Help desk
< August 29	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 31 >

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 30

Review of User:Thahib/sandbox

My message was in reference to my sandbox page about my "rap alias" i was told to mention notability, i understand that could possibly be evidence of the existence of my name, however i dont have any evidence online that can prove of my rap name eg website references on other website. i would simply like an example of notability and reffrences that i could use as i guideline to use to allow my wiki article to be accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thahib (talk • contribs) 02:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, notability is established by significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles or books published with reputable publishers. There is also a more specific notability guideline on musicians. Sources need not be available online, though that's obviously easier for our readers. But the article content must be based on those sources. For example, I doubt Aaliyah had anything to say about Thahib, and if she had, we'd need a more specific reference than just "Rap music".

You might also want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest; writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. Huon (talk) 02:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The C2D1 Ghost

I was hoping you could help me with specifics about how to support the article adequately with reliable sources: are the sources I've used viewed as not being reliable, should I have more sources, or is it a combination of both? Thank you. Spirit Tune (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are several issues with your references. Firstly, some are indeed not reliable by Wikipedia's standards; for example, Sci-Fi Talk doesn't show any indication of fact-checking or editorial oversight; judging by its "about" page, it seems to be someone's personal website. Equally problematic, it mentions Geneseo only in passing and in connection with 1884 events - I doubt that's the same haunting as the 1985 one, and there isn't enough information to confirm that either way. All the references provided seem to be primarily about some movie or other (or, in one case, about a symposium about a movie), not about the haunting itself, and few provide significant coverage of the haunting. In fact, the Woman Around Town article explicitly does not cover the 1985 events: "What eventually happened to both gentlemen will not be revealed until the movie’s release."

Furthermore, Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources. Major parts of your draft, including the events of the haunting, are entirely unreferenced, and from the sources provided I could not verify that an "injurious bodily attack" occured (to provide just one example).

In summary, what you need are reliable sources that actually confirm the article's content (or conversely, you need content that summarizes what the sources say about the haunting). That's not what you currently have. Huon (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The National Institute of Youth Performing Arts Australia

Hi there I just submitted a new article for National Institute of Youth Performing arts. Has this been lost? This content should replace previous content but the screen flashed back to the original entry that someone else prepared. FGrey — Preceding unsigned comment added by FGrey (talk • contribs) 03:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your contribution is not lost; it's hidden due to a technical trick. You can see it here. But since Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Institute of Youth Performing Arts is a redirect that points to another draft on the same topic, namely Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The National Institute of Youth Performing Arts Australia, trying to visit the first page will just send you to the second (there will be a line "Redirected from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Institute of Youth Performing Arts" at the top when you have reached that page via the redirect).

The easiest way to recover your new draft would be to follow the first link I provided, to edit the current revision of the page and to remove the line "#REDIRECT [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The National Institute of Youth Performing Arts Australia]]" from the very top of that draft. However, if you are the author of both drafts, it might be better not to bring a second version live again and instead to improve the draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The National Institute of Youth Performing Arts Australia which already is much closer to Wikipedia's preferred style and provides some examples of how reference tags are supposed to work. Of course you can still edit the hidden draft to recover parts you consider worthy of being merged. Huon (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to add if i am not having reference

Hi,

How can i add my details if i am new person over internet and want people to know about me. Can i add my details as an article and it will be over internet or i have to have some reference for myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mishra umesh (talk • contribs) 04:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's purpose is to let people know what has already been written about in reliable, secondary sources. It is not a platform for advertising oneself to the world. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RADHA SOAMI SATSANG TRUST SHEKHEWAL LUDHIANA PUNJAB [INDIA]rsst 14:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

. Baba Channan Singhji was one of the deciples of great master Baba Sawan Singh ji, who was most loveable obedient, won the heart of his Guru Baba Sawan Singh ji by serving so hard in the fields of agriculture,at Sirsa Sikander pur Haryana India of agriculture land a property of dera Beas . Spiritually enlightened, and get mastery of all senses with blessings of his guru, BABA SAWAN SINGH JI. After completing the spiritual training and blessed with complete spiritual power up to Sachkhand [Anami]. Then by obeying order of his guru to go back to your native village Said pur in disst. Amritsar pb India to spread the fragrance of Naam and to disseminate the spiritual satsang. By getting inner order from his Guru, Baba Channan Singh Ji disseminated the spiritual satsang from 1967 to 2002.In between foundation stone was laid in 1982 at shekhewal Ludhiana of Radha soami satsang trust shekhewal ludhiana pb india now is the centre of spiritualism and "sun Smaad" [popularly known as SMADHIAN WALA DERA] Dera Baba Channan Singh Ji which is the real recognition of poora guru.

RADHA SOAMI SATSANG TRUST SHEKHEWAL LUDHIANA PB.INDIA Radha Soami Satsang trust shekhewal ludhiana punjab [India] lineage of successors:-

PARM SANT TULSI SAHIB JI OF HATHRAS UP [INDIA]INITIATED SANT MAT IN 19TH CENTURY.

FOLLOWED BY *PARM SANT SHIV DAYAL SINGH JI popularly  KNOWN AS SOAMI JI MAHARAJ.
SUCCEEDED BY *BABA JAIMAL SINGH JI FOUNDER OF RADHA SOAMI SATSANG BEAS 1884 TO 1903.
*BABA SAWAN SINGH JI ALSO KNOWN AS GREAT MASTER 1903 TO 1948.
*BABA TEJA SINGH JI FOUNDER OF DERA BAB TEJA SINGH JI SAID PUR 1948 TO 1966.
*BABA CHANNAN SINGH JI FOUNDER OF DERA BABA CHANNAN SINGH JI SAID PUR 1967 TO 2002.
*HAZOOR BABA AMIR SINGH JI FOUNDER OF RADHA SOAMI SATSANG TRUST SHEKHEWAL LUDHIANA PB. INDIA.  NOW SERVING FROM THE PRESENCE OF BABA CHANNAN SINGH JI WITH HOLY SATSANG AT LUDHIANA PUNJAB [INDIA]rsst 14:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 07delhi (talk • contribs)

This is the help desk, for assisting with problems with new articles. Please Click here to create a new article. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Font!

I want to make a wiki about my very own font Crazy Pixel. You can find it here: Crazy Pixel (I am minidonut.)

All Crazy Pixel fonts:

Crazy Pixel
Crazy Pixel Extended
Crazy Pixel Extended Extended
Crazy Pixel Extended Extended Extended
Crazy Pixel Small Caps

Not done yet:

Crazy Pixel Italic
Crazy Pixel Narrow
Crazy Pixel Bold

Mathyman (talk) 16:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there are reliable secondary sources for the font, it's probably not notable enough for an article. Furthermore, it might be better to leave it to someone else to write about your font since you are likely to have a conflict of interest. Huon (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bryan Bell (Technologist)

Hi, I am having trouble submitting my article.

I have tried REALLY Hard to read the directions and then follow them!

I believe my article is called: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bryan Bell (Technologist)

I go to Edit, arrange my text I click SAVE PAGE at the Bootom (and try the preview too, which looks fine)

then: as per the text: You are encouraged to make improvements by clicking on the "Edit" tab at the top of this page. When you are ready to resubmit, click here.

I click the "click here" link BUT the page is then BLANK

I am very confused. Please help. -Paul Pdbmusic (talk) 20:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That "blank" page contains a hatnote: "Press Save page to request a new review. A box explaining details about this submission will appear at the bottom of the page. A automated robot will update the page later and remove the draft article box." The article doesn't vanish; instead a new section (which is indeed blank except for the review template and a comment explaining the process) gets added. The draft had already been resubmitted (along with another two copies of the same draft; I removed the duplicates).

However, there are several issues with the draft that make it likely it will be declined. First of all, almost all of it is unsourced; there's but a single interview provided as a source, and that does not suffice to verify all the article's claims. For example, it doesn't mention Michael Jackson or the NBC Tonight Show. Furthermore, the draft's tone is unencyclopedic and laudatory. For example, the one sourced sentence calls Bryan Bell "dedicated to quality and innovation", but the source itself does not - even if it did, it would still be a rather vacusous statement. Also, we should not address Bell by his given name.

In short, the draft needs more and better references (I'm not sure KVR is reliable by Wikipedia's standards), and it needs to follow what those references have to say about Bell. Secodary sources are much better than primary sources such as interviews. Huon (talk) 20:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reference problem

I sent an article about venaky it's a multidisciplinary vision like yuga and we are the reference, we are the beginners of this way of exercise and sports and meditation so I wrote our website as the reference that is being built but the article is disproved and i really don't know what to do...

Venaky a way to insight by mohsen daemi

please help me regards Mdaemiid (talk) 20:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a service to advertise new creations. Unless and until it has been reported on in depth by reliable, independent sources, it cannot be included in Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 20:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kurt Rappaport

Hello, I resubmitted the page with additional context (per the previous reviewer's comments). It appears that I've been stuck on #569 in the reviewer queue for some time now. Can you tell me whether the Wiki is indeed to be reviewed again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barrett90035 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're not stuck on #569 in the queue; the entire queue is about 569 articles long (actually by now it's closer to 600). The oldest unreviewed drafts are from August 21, so it may take a few more days until your draft will be reviewed again. Please be patient.

Meanwhile, I doubt the draft establishes Rappaport's notability. That requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. While your sources are clearly both reliable and independent, coverage is minimal: One of the six doesn't even mention Rappaport, three just mention him in a single line as somebody's real estate agent, and the remaining two provide a few more details about his involvement in the respective deals, but little else. Conversely, significant parts of the draft are not supported by those references at all: For example, they don't confirm the number of Rappaport's employees, his business volume, or the details of Rappaport's residence. They even contradict the draft regarding the price of the home Rappaport sold to Tom Cruise. Huon (talk) 22:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]