Help desk
< February 27	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 29 >

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 28

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Auslogics BoostSpeed

My article on Auslogics BoostSpeed was declined due to it "sounding like an advertisement" and "insufficient sources". I would like to argue the latter, as there are 10 completely independent sources that are considered to be reliable authorities in the industry. How many more sources are needed??? As for it possibly sounding like an advertisement, any perceived praise for the subject is due to most mentions in independent sources being reviews giving the subject high marks and recommending it. I did try to keep my language as neutral as possible, but felt that I had to include all this information in the article to prove the subject's notability. I am in no way trying to promote this piece of software here, just trying to have a subject worthy of inclusion in WP get its own article. I would really appreciate any help from more experienced editors with rewriting the article to not sound like an advertisement, so it can be included in WP. Thank you very much in advance! TaraSwimms (talk) 03:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that the one thing that makes your article look like an ad is the "Product Components" section. We really frown upon those, especially when there's only one source and it's the company. Without that, I certainly wouldn't call it an advert. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you very much for your input. I have edited the article section in question. Could you please take another look at it and let me know if it needs more editing or if it could be accepted this way? I left plain naming of what the program is intended to do. It's a complex piece of software, so I felt like the article needed the details, but I'll appreciate your opinion and/or suggestions. Thank you in advance! TaraSwimms (talk) 12:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly...now let's see... Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 14:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the products section - believe me, we're better without it - but have accepted the article on the strength of the many reviews. Congratulations :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 14:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! TaraSwimms (talk) 02:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

resolving notability issue

In notability section about musicians it is mentioned that at least one criteria should be met, including: CD record on national chart label, competition and TV appearance. The article below is about the person who has all three conditions. Meantime she was repeatedly rejected on "notability" basis. Editors do not mention anything specific, just that the person is not notable. But this contradicts WIKI's definition of notability. How too resolve this issue?

The article in draft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Svetlana_Gorokhovich,_pianist

DeepBlue1000 (talk) 01:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the article, although I would advise you to continue to add sources. They are enough, but only barely. Thanks for your work :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 01:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nevin (surname)

Looking for clarification on article creation mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.20.77 (talk) 09:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for clarification on article creation mistakes - if any now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.20.77 (talk) 09:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your other draft article was poorly cited (in my opinion) because its sources were generally sales sites and family genealogy pages. This new article looks much better. For articles about surnames, citations to authoritative published sources (such as surname dictionaries) will always carry a lot more weight. Nice one! Sionk (talk) 12:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Johnstone (artist)

This is a message for ChrisGualtieri in regards to my article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Johnstone (artist). I wondered if you could give me some pointers of what would constitute more reliable and independant sources, as I used sources from British public institutions such as the Tate and the National Galleries of Scotland.Williamsummerfield1988 (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having had a look at your article I can see why the reviewer may have declined it - it is weakly sourced and does not make any strong claims of notability. However, looking at Wikipedia's alternative notability criteria for artists, WP:ARTIST, it is very possible Johnstone will meet at least one of those points. Can you add references to show Johnstone meets the criteria of WP:ARTIST? Sionk (talk) 12:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did a fair bit of work on it and resubmitted it. Should be good to go, although there are two sentences that could use additional citations, these are marked with a ^{[citation needed]} tag. With a bit of rewriting I think a DYK could be in order. An interesting subject with lots of sources discussing him, and of course very timely with the current exhibition. France3470 (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent job, I'm impressed! Article now in mainspace. Sionk (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trisha Torrey

I'm trying to write an article for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Trisha Torrey and I'm not sure where I'm going wrong. It's currently been in the submission queue for 8 days. Can anyone advise as to what my next step should be? Thanks

Xedaps (talk) 12:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article had lots of long online news articles cited, which may have put some AfC reviewers off in preference of 'easier' reviews. But all the same it is not a criticism of you, as you have clearly done a bit of research to compile the list. I've accepted the article but, because only two of the sources address the subject (Trisha Torrey) in any detail, she is borderline notable in my opinion. Other editors may have a different view, so it will help if you can develop the article further. All the best! Sionk (talk) 13:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Francoise Adret

The reviewer identified as JayJay has rejected my proposed article on the basis that the subject's significance is not clear. I believe that it is perfectly clear. Mme Adret had a long and distinguished career as a pioneer of contemporary dance in France, for which she has been honored by her government. I cannot believe that she does not warrant notice in Wikipedia. I would be be glad of another review by someone knowledgeable in dance history. Many thanks. -- Claudeconyers Claudeconyers (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have read through the submission; whilst I agree with you that she is notable for her work in the field of dance—and the style of referencing is more or less ok—the tone of the article is plainly promotional and the content should be substantially copy edited to read from a neutral point of view. I have altered the decline reason to reflect this. Pol430 talk to me 18:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]