Help desk
< February 15	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 17 >

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.

February 16

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Terror Transmission

So, I got rid of the YouTube links, even though I fail to see how referencing a video interview by linking to the video interview isn't "reliable." Also, I've used as many if not more credible references than many accepted podcast pages, but can't see how the one I created is somehow unacceptable, particularly by comparison. For instance...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_Sack

They use four references, all of which internal.

I hope I don't sound bitter in tone because I would honestly like help on this article/page. I am particularly confused by what appears to be inconsistency in accept/reject decisions, and I don't know what I am doing "wrong." Thanks in advance.

S666. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinistar666 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So firstly all sources need to be reliable. These would be publications with editorial oversight. This doesn't seem like too big of a problem for the article right now. The major problem, however, is that the sources must be independent. (See WP:VRS) Most of these are internal references, which do not help establish notability. So, the sources boil down to the Bravewords article, which is not about Terror Transmission, but the track.

Essentially, the problem is that due to the lack of verifiable, reliable sources that are not trivial mentions, it does not fulfill notability criteria.

And frankly, I don't think Film Sack is a properly referenced article. I'm going to leave a message on talk there.A412 (Talk * C) 01:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pyarge Aagbittaite

please help me to get sources of importance because this is the first time one Kannada song crossing more than 2 lakes views within 15 days of release of song if why this kolavri song can be notable then this can be notable i have also provide news paper ref for supporting the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaamikamathu (talk • contribs) 04:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please write your submission in English...it's hard to tell how important this song/movie is because I can't read it. :( Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sir the article is in English language and you can read and understand the simple language thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaamikamathu (talk • contribs) 07:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The version Nolelover declined was as you can see here in English, but it included lyrics which shouldn't normally added in Wikipedia and the second decline wasn't because of the language, but because of notability (for films, see WP:NFILM which is clearly wrong, and should be declined as WP:NMUSIC) which means that the song is (in the eyes of Wikipedia) not notable enough to get it's own entry in this encyclopedia. Please check also the things i marked with ^{[disambiguation needed]} ^{[dead link‍]} and ^{[failed verification]} mabdul 13:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm I completely missed the lyrics header...sorry about that Anaamikamathu. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 13:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for declining with the wrong rationale... --B music ian 13:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sir, it is understandable that even after reference Wikipedia need more support please help to get this song to be in Wikipedia because of its lyrics which is rare mixture of Kannada and Urdu language please publish this article in Wikipedia and let reader decide this article's importance

thank you anaamikamathu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaamikamathu (talk • contribs) 03:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that is not how Wikipedia works. This is an encyclopedia. Please read WP:MUSIC and you will recognize that (at the moment) this song don't meet the threshold of our notability criteria of music related topics. mabdul 14:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Bojack

Hello, I received a message saying the article I created for Paul Bojack was not accepted.

However, Paul Bojack is notable because under your guidlines for Creative Professional -- 4 c) "the person's work has won significant critical attention". Mr Bojack's work has received strong reviews in major publications such as The New York Times, Variety, LA Weekly, Film Threat. This is significant critical attention -- The New York Times is the most famous newspaper in the world. Variety is the most important trade publication for movies and entertainment. In addition, the article includes references / links to these publications and reviews. These are reliable, independent publiched sources.

In other words, the notabilty and significance of the person is established (Mr. Bojack's work has won significant critical attention) and this notablity is supported by independent sources (the actual reviews from The New York Times, Variety etc). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerOlympic2012 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the article, however I strongly suggest you find more sources - anyone could still nominate the article for deletion in its present state and it would be a tough sell to keep it. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

can any one help me in this regards?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Ustad_Badar_uz_Zaman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umerali2204 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have blanked the page...are you done with it? Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because the article draft is also at the talkpage at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ustad Badar uz Zaman. mabdul 13:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

what is polarization? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.164.37 (talk) 07:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what is permittivity? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.164.37 (talk) 07:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try asking at the reference desk. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spyder (software)

I don't understand the resistance behind allowing awesome open source software projects described on Wikipedia. Given the arguments against this article I could as well put down the Mediawiki info. Can the awesomeness of FOSS projects be judged by experts in open source/software development? Requiring FOSS to be published in international magazines not by authors/contributors instead of technical evaluation of the features/completeness/popularity and scope first is kind of very-very strange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techtonik (talk • contribs) 08:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay..."International news" outlets was a bit of an exaggeration. The point is that notability is demonstrated by significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Wikipedia and the spyderlib wiki are not reliable sources, because they are open projects, and neither are blogs. The review in Techworld is exactly what you need....but you only have one. Add more reviews of that type, and resubmit. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I expanded Anjuta a bit with German sources. Likely that I'm able to do this with other applications but I don't have the time. There are so many ediors/applications out there, that it is not that easy to find the good (notable) ones and separate them from the "non notable" ones. Regards, mabdul 15:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eckstein, Karl

Hi! I need your help badly. Please, tell me how to add more info about a person? I'd like to add the birth day/month, country, citizenship etc.(I didn't find the template). This info is usually on the right side under a photo. And I also have problems with describing this photo. I managed only to insert it. Please, help. Thanks a lot. Lerysik (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you are looking for is called an "infobox". We have many kinds, but you one for people is called {{infobox person}}. If you click that link and scroll down, you'll see the basic template with the blank parameters. Copy that to your article and fill in the parameters. [[Here's an example of a completed template and what it looks like. Remember though that just having the info on the page isn't enough - you have to actually source it. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot!)) I've done necessary changes and hope this time everything will be OK)) Will you check it, please?))Lerysik (talk) 09:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments left at the submission. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 19:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UK Hand Knitting Association

Morning. I need some help with the above article. The Association (UKHKA), to which this article refers, used to be called the British Hand Knitting Confederation (BHKC). There is already a Wiki for the British Hand Knitting Association but this should be changed due to the name change. So I'm trying to generate a new article under the current name of the association without much luck.

I initially generated the article in much the same format as the original but with a bit of additional information from the UKHKA website. That was rejected for not having any citations. The original BHKC doesn't have any either so I assume the rules have changed since that was put on.

So I added some citations but now it's been rejected because it 'reads more like an advert' and also that there should be citations from independent, etc sources and "not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed"

Geez, I thought this would be so easy for my first dabble at Wiki!

So, I need a little help.

With regards to it 'reading like an advert', I'm a bit stumped with this but I'll go back over the text anyway. Not sure which bits are like an advert but I'll re-write in a different style in any case.

But I am a bit stumped with the citations and the "materials produced by the creator of the subject". I hunted around on the internet and found various articles that other organisations had written about the Assoc - universities, the Guardian, etc - mainly about the Awards that the association runs each year. So these aren't 'materials produced by the creator of the subject' but articles written by organisations about the awards, etc. So I'm a bit stumped as to what is needed here.

Thankyou for any assistance you can provide :-)

Pauliebee (talk) 10:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've actually just moved British Hand Knitting Confederation to UK Hand Knitting Association, so now you can just work on it there instead of using Articles for Creation. :) There's no reason to have two articles on the same company. As you mention though, it doesn't have any sources so the odds that someone would nominate it for deletion go up dramatically. Now, I glanced though the sources used in your submission, and none of them really stand out. :( Yes, most of them talked about what the association was doing, but that doesn't really help you if they don't talk about the association itself. There's a big difference here - require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and I don't see that here. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

cable trays

Difference between FRP AND GRP CABLE trays?

where do we use frp and where do we use grp? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.97.72.253 (talk) 12:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps.--Hallows AG (talk) 12:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent need to get an article published

Hi!

Im in urgent need to get this article published. Is there any way to get it published first with a disclaimer on top based on the reviewer comment? As long as the article is up for public viewing and reachable when being search. Really need to get this up and off my hand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Government_Transformation_Programme_(GTP)_Malaysia

Sorry, but that's not the way Wikipedia works. We are not an advertising agency for publishing your programmes. Also, I found a copyright violation in there, which really doesn't make me feel good about the rest of the submission. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ustad_Badar_uz_Zaman

Some one please accept it Umerali2204 (talk) 12:14, 16 February 2012 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Umerali2204 (talk • contribs) 12:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs more additional sources, especially the "Awards" section. Cheers, Hallows AG (talk) 12:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spectre R45

This is a pathetic excuse for not releasing an article...

"The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Spectre R42. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you."

Need more information about what is "Sufficient" content for an article. In time people will see this article and update it themselves. It's kind of the point of having wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stew2000 (talk • contribs) 12:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an updated prototype of an existing car and only one was built (except for the show model)? With only one source, I'm afraid I'd have to agree with the reviewer, unless you can find more sources about the R45. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 16:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a very interesting problem.
To me, even though the R45 is an updated version it is different to the R42.
I could merge it into the R42's article. however it could possibly make more sense to create a new article called Spectre Cars Ltd which would highlight the history of the company and have a proper place for both the R42 and R45.
--Stew2000 (talk) 20:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW. You should delete this page because of wiki logic: Porsche_969
--Stew2000 (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It may be completely different, but with only one source you aren't gonna convince many editors. :( Merging is probably the best. Also, I have merged the Porsche article. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 01:13, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashtar Alkhirsan

Hello Wikipedia,

Could you let us know which facts you need verified in the 'Ashtar Al-khirsan' biography,

Many thanks,

Abdul Mousawi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosfilm12 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is not considered a reliable source as the content is user-generated. In order for the article to be properly sourced, and for the subject to demonstrate it meets the guidelines of notability it needs citations which are third-party, and independent of the subject. Have a look at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Preferably each fact in the article should be followed by an inline citation, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. France3470 (talk) 15:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of False Prophets and Teachers

I asked several moderators about this article, and they advised me that the article would not be accepted in its current form. I am curious to know whether this would possibly be accepted:

I would revise this article and details to form the article as "A List of Anti-Christian Quotes"?

The article would contain only quotes which explicitly say something contradictory to the Christian faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmfriess (talk • contribs) 16:20, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not for soapboxing, original research or indiscriminate collections of information. I don't think that topic would ever be accepted. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 16:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article has a potential to get accepted, but please read WP:REFB how to cite correctly and find a reference for every person! mabdul 10:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mini Rover ROV

article for review "mini rover rov" was declined. article was edited and submitted for new review and declined because there had been "no changes".

i followed the instructions on the page that stated: "When the submission is ready to be re-submitted, click here and press the Save page button to request a new review". i clicked on "click here" and the page that displayed did not show the edits i had made.

it displayed only the text below:

Please don't change anything and press save

SUBST:submit

so, i didn't change anything and pressed save. no edits were saved. what did i do wrong? i have submitted the article again by clicking "save page" and not clicking "click here" as instructed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldtjr (talk • contribs) 16:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...that's odd. I'm not sure what's going on there, but here's another way. Edit the page (you can click that link to go directly there) and add {{subst:submit}} to the top. That should do the trick. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 17:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/afranet

Hi why is this page not accepted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/afranet

1- How can the first IT company in iran in the tehran stock exchange with a market value of 20 million USD not be important

2- are business week, tehran stock exchange and tehran time not independent, not credible references! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.180.245 (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those are all reliable sources, but not they way used here. First, the Tehran Times is an advertisement. The stock exchange doesn't help establish notability (just because it has a listing doesn't make it notable, and the Business Week listing is in the same vein....it look like a directory listing, which again, doesn't establish notability. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 17:14, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you say that is an advertisement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.180.245 (talk) 17:23, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it looks like, is written like and is signed like an advertisement. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 17:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem is that even if we count that newspaper as reliable/third party (what i do) - it is simply not enough! One good reference, but we need more! mabdul 10:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP

what is the right age for a young person to began dating and why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.21.4 (talk) 18:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on what 'dating' means to them. Also note that this is not the place to be asking that question...perhaps you can try the reference desk? Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 18:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Schaffer-Vega Diversity System

Dear Help desk, I would like to add a few images to the article, a photo of an original Schaffer-Vega Diversity System, an advertising from a music magazine in the late 70s and a collection of scanned music magazine articles from the 70s, three images in total, available here: http://www.banane.at/svds-wikipedia/ . I just don't have adequate access rights for this (yet), but the images are needed to complete the article before I submit it for review again. Thank you, Franz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ffarklas-at (talk • contribs) 18:27, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can always upload the images later, Wikipedia has no deadline!. Needless to say, lack of images isn't something a submission would ever be declined for. joe•roe^t•c 18:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia:Sandbox

Is there a page that explains how I can edit equations?????? HELP!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy Holland2 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking for Help:Displaying a formula? A412 (Talk * C) 23:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Andy Holland2/sandbox

mmh, maybe see Help:Math. Regards, mabdul 10:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Donald MacPherson

Hello I put in a request to change the username of Vancouverdrugman to Vancouverpolicymaker yesterday morning. I am not sure what the status of the change is...I can not login under that username. Does that mean that the change request has been denied?

Also, I have four indpendent reliable website links that back up the information stated on Donald MacPherson's wiki page. Why are they being rejected?

Thank you Jasmine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vancouverdrugman (talk • contribs) 23:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the first one. The submission, however:

Not an independent source. See WP:VRS
This doesn't help show his notability. Notability is not inherited.
Just because he is listed does not mean he is notable. See the guidelines on notability for academics.
That is the Amazon listing for his book. How does this show his notability.

What would be better sources would be evidence that he fulfills one of the criteria at WP:GNG, WP:BIO, or WP:PROF. A412 (Talk * C) 00:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your Name Change. Please check WP:CHUS. :- ) DCS 00:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]