Help desk
< December 6	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 8 >

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.

December 7

Article created, but . . .

I received an email about my article Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/Glen Daniel Andrews that said the article was created and classified as start-class. What exactly do I need to do to get it published? One reviewer made some changes, but didn't offer suggestions for more. I'm unsure where to go at this point.Exumbris (talk) 01:29, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That article was created, but it was speedily deleted as a copyright violation of http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=6257 - we cannot accept copyrighted text. The draft will have to be rewritten from scratch in your own words. Huon (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peace Ship

Hello- I just created a page, on Henry Ford's Peace Ship. I had significant problems formatting- I seem to have submitted the same material multiple times, and I can't figure out how get rid of duplicated content. I apologize for the inconvenience, and I hope someone can tell me how to remedy the problem. 2housemouse (talk) 04:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I think I see the problem. You have one copy at User:2housemouse, another at User:1housemouse, and then one at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peace Ship. Did you register for two accounts by mistake? Or is User:1housemouse a different editor who is working on the article with you? If you are the same person, simply decide which of the new names you wish to use and we can redirect the other one to it. Just let me know. I'd suggest using 2housemouse as that's the account that was registered first. Note also that you can simply remove the duplicate text from the two user pages at any time.

Now to the article itself... It's very good (notable subject, well-referenced and well-written) and I'm happy to move this onto the encyclopedia (i.e. move it to article space) for you. I've already done a bit of clean up on it to make the references show, consolidate the references, and add some wikilinks. It's certainly in good shape to move. Would you like me to do that? Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 11:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I really appreciate the clean up you did on my article. If possible, could you move the article into the main space?

As for the to usernames, they are both mine. I created the second username so I could edit my original article, which was probably unnecessary. I have decided to delete User:1housemouse and keep User:2housemouse. Thanks for the help, 2housemouse (talk) 14:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the draft into the main space. You may want to add some more categories; something ship-related might be appropriate, but since the article isn't so much about the ship itself but about the one voyage I didn't find anything particularly relevant. Huon (talk) 15:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Embedded Instrumentation

My submission on Embedded Instrumentation was declined because the reviewer said that an article on this subject already existed. He cited an article on Embedded Systems, which is something quite different. Embedded Systems are computer systems that are part of a larger complex of electronic and mechanical subsystems, and quite often is never seen or used directly by users. For example, the electronic system that operates a robot in a factory is embedded in the robot and is considered an embedded system. It is part of the larger factory automation system that runs the factory. Embedded Instrumentation is something quite different. Instruments or test functionality is embedded (placed inside of) semiconductors so that engineers and designers can test the chips where the instruments have been embedded. In addition, these 'embedded instruments' can also be used to test circuit boards and systems. This testing is a critical portion of the production process for electronic equipment because without testing the quality of the electronic systems produced would be quite low. The manufacturer would not know whether the system he produced actually worked the way it should. So Embedded Instruments are totally distinct from Embedded Systems despite the fact that they share the word 'embedded' in their names. I noticed that in Wiki there are other articles that distinguish the various kinds or types of instrumentation. For example, there are articles on virtual instrumentation and virtual instrument. Please offer your guidance. WSoxFan (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)WSoxFan[reply]

It does indeed look like the first reviewer was mistaken - you can help clear the confusion by explaining the distinction clearly in the lead of your draft, please also use WP:Wikilinks to link key concepts in your draft to existing articles about them, such as [[microchip]]. The entire article seems to have been repeated on the page, please delete one of them. Your sources are unclear because you have not used inline citation, see WP:Referencing for beginners for guidance on how to do that. Once you've solved these issues it may be ready for another review. Roger (talk) 13:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paradyse

please rereview the Paradyse article. I've added plenty of notations and links to support all info entailed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrOVW (talk • contribs) 18:16, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A few recommendations:

There is a specific WP:Infobox for pro wrestlers; I've added it for you. Any line you fill out there will then appear in the article; but do not add new lines that you think should be in the box, they simply won't show up because they aren't part of the standard format.
You're having a grammar issues with Capitalising Letters Too Much. Please do a quick readup on Google for English language rules of capitalisation, and make sure you aren't over-capitalising.
Your writing isn't too far off Wikipedia standard, but it reads a little too much like a promo. For example "... and Paradyse was born" is not precise, encyclopedic language. You can just say "... and then Long created his Paradyse character."
You have provided some sources, and several of them are quite good sources. The issue is, we can't tell which source supports which fact, because they aren't written as WP:Footnotes. Please check out WP:CITEHOW for how to turn those into proper footnotes, and then place each source in the right place. For example, if the Washington Blade provided the analysis of Paradyse's role in gay culture, you would put the footnote for the Blade directly at the end of that paragraph.
It is totally fine to report on others' analysis, like if Blade analyses his character, but make sure you don't break WP:Original research and insert your own analysis as to what's going on. Editors have to remain neutral, and only report published theories and opinions from serious journalism or academic sources.
Once you turn your references into Footnotes, if you click on the "tools for reviewers" button on your Submit box for the article, there's an option "Run Reflinks". If you click that, any bare URL that is in a footnote will be converted to a full title-author-pubication-date footnote, so that can save you time.

This is a pretty good start. Fix these things I mentioned, and you can drop me a line on my Talk page once you think they're all cleaned up and I can take another look. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some additional comments: According to the sources the ring name is "Paredyse", not "Paradyse", so the draft should probably be rewritten and renamed. I couldn't find a confirmation that Long/Paredyse and Kamikaze Kid are one and the same. The Ohio Valley Wrestling website is a primary source on their own wrestler, the page linked to doesn't mention him at all, and their roster page on him contradicts part of the draft, for example the billed weight. wrestlingarsenal.net was "temporarily unavailable" when I tried to look it up, but going by the URL, the source is probably just a blog, not a reliable source anyway. Huon (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]