Help desk
< June 27	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 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.

June 28

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Stephen_(Steve)_K._Ray

Hi!

Would you please tell me what this means:

25 June 2012 (diff | hist) . . b Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stephen (Steve) K. Ray‎; 17:20 . . (-52)‎ . . ‎ArticlesForCreationBot (talk | contribs)‎ (Cleaning up the submission of afc (general cleanup) (bot))

and the status of my submission?

Thank you very much.

Respectfully,

FireWriter154 (talk) 03:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The ArticlesForCreationBot automatically moves submission templates to the top of the article; that's what that history entry is about. You can have a look at the bot's changes.

The draft has been submitted for review again; it carries a "review waiting" message and is categorized among the Pending AfC submissions. It will be reviewed in a few days.

But I don't think you have sufficiently addressed the notability issues. Many of your sources are primary sources such as Ray's store or his video series' website. Unless recordings of the TV interviews are available, verifying their content will be almost impossible for our readers. Only one of the sources accessible to me is an independent source, the Mywesttexas article. More would definitely be better. Huon (talk) 03:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/M.T. Hla (U Tun Hla)

Dear Editors,

I am confused about my article M.T. Hla (U Tun Hla) which I submitted and have a few questions about it and another matter.

1) I have been told on my talk page that the M.T. Hla (U Tun Hla) has been "created". However, the article does not appear on the internet. I saw earlier that it was at the "Start" level and it was suggested that 1) an info box be added 2) database info be added and 3) a photo be added. The first two of these have been added. I haven't managed to put up a photogaph yet. I am wondering why the article has not gone up on the internet yet.

2) On my talk page Tom Morris invites me to make more submissions. I have made a few hundred edits and four original article submissions, including the one on M.T. Hla above.

Tom Morris says:

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

I don't understand Tom Morris' remark above. Don't all articles at Wikipedia now have to be reviewed before being accepted? (My earlier article submissions did not go through this process). When I go to create articles yourself, I find that it is really the same process as the Article Wizard. In both cases, articles must be reviewed. Or is there another way to submit in a more direct way so that the article does not have to go through this review process?Hsaya (talk) 10:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say the article "does not appear on the internet." It does; it's at M.T. Hla (U Tun Hla) in the main articlespace, and it can be found via the search bar. Search engines such as Google may take some time to find that page, but there's nothing we can do about that.

You can upload a photo to the Wikimedia Commons with their Upload Wizard, but please make sure it's licensed with a free license or in the public domain. The Commons do not accept copyrighted images unless publishes under a free license. Wikipedia does in some cases, and you could upload it there via Special:Upload, but for that it'd have to be impossible (and not just difficult) to find an equivalent freely licensed photo. Further help on images is available at Help:Files.

Articles need not be reviewed when the editor is autoconfirmed (and you are). You can either create a draft in your sandbox and move it into the main articlespace when it's finished, or you can directly create it in the articlespace. The easiest way to do the latter is to search for the topic, and if we don't already have an article of that name, the following line will be displayed at the top of the search results:

You may create the page "New title", but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.

"New title" will be the title you searched for. Simply click the redlink, and it will take you to a new page of that title. Huon (talk) 11:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon,

Thanks for the explanation for why the article may not have turned up on the internet yet. I thought it would appear on Google immediately.

And also thanks for explaining how I might submit articles by myself without going through the Articles for Creation process.

I want to put a picture up with the M.T. Hla piece, but am mindful of the difficulties of copyright. I may submit a question about the photo I have through the copyright questions forum. Best regards Hsaya (talk) 12:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TKE

Moved from User talk:mabdul

Hi Mabdul,

Can you pleae assist us by telling us why our submissions are declined?

Thank you

Moneen Booyse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthonynathan (talk • contribs) 11:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't understand why contributors ignoring edit notices. mabdul 11:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The submission was declined because it did not cite any reliable sources such as newspaper articles or articles in trade magazines. Such sources are required by our policies on verifiability and notability. Huon (talk) 14:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Environment Films

Can someone advise me on how to make the draft article mentioned above suitable for contribution? I am trying to give our film company a presence of Wikipedia, one which I can then build on over time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carinax03 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The draft's text needs to be supported by citations to reliable sources that are independent of the subject. You currently have a selection of external links, but firstly many of them seem to be self-publishedd sources without editorial oversight or the like (thus not reliable), secondly, it is not at all clear which reference is supposed to support which part of the draft (you should use footnotes to clarify that), and thirdly none of those I checked (except their own website, which obviously is not independent) even mentioned Environment Films.

Significant coverage in such sources is necessary to establish the company's notability. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper articles.

You might also want to read our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing about your company is discouraged. Huon (talk) 14:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brooke mayo: article declined?

Wondering why my article on Brooke mayo was declined. It had notable sources and is completely valid. Would like to know what changes need to be made to make it an article?

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Candaceowens

Candaceowens (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article text must be supported by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Many of your current references and external links point to Mayo's own blog and/or website; those are not independent. Other sources do not confirm the content they are cited for: www.appstate.edu does not say that Mayo graduated from that university, for example. Significant coverage in such reliable sources - newspaper articles, perhaps? - is necessary to establish Mayo's notability.

Furthermore, parts of the draft read more like an advertisement or a PR press release than an encyclopedia article. In particular, encyclopedias don't usually suggest readers visit the subjects' websites ("View her blog"?), and the text about Mayo's book is unduly laudatory. Huon (talk) 14:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/glass of milk

Liv life healty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.92.235 (talk) 17:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We try to write an encyclopedia, not provide health advice. Huon (talk) 18:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Endodontic Therapy Types

there is a need to categorize the Endodontic therapy's , because there is a simple version I was informed of by mt dentist in "1978" from the Pennsylvania Dental Association , thus treatment does not involve any repair to the tooth ,{it's-self"}, and that by old rulings that created such therapies , were in fact , also based on the laws ," you break it , you bought it " , by such acts, was then the dentists obligation to repair the tooth he damaged , yes ,and at no Extra cost to the Patient , would get the permanent filling , to complete the sessions of a root canal therapy / the simple version , my dentist told me that thus is / was grandfathered in as such into the American dental Associations constitutional By-Laws , hidden by their code of Ethics , {that need to be Applied unto them}, in their Archives-Libraries that are only open to the dentist there-of . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.18.44.138 (talk) 19:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We already have an endodontic therapy article. I'm not sure how ethics codes would be relevant to the therapies themselves. Huon (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hey Houn you really missed the point , again try opening your eyes too and you'll see that I was referring to the fact that "not" all ( root canal therapies / Endodontic therapies ) are the same .

And how would that information not be at home in our article on endodontic therapy? Shouldn't that article cover all such therapies? Huon (talk) 02:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SCOTTDALE NYETI

why was my article declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.206.24.240 (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a couple of reasons. It did not show any significant coverage of Nyeti in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and such coverage is necessary to establish Nyeti's notability. The content is unverifiable and in part seems to be just plain wrong; for example, Nyeti is supposed to have won a Hip Hop World Award in 2011, but he is not listed among the winners. I also doubt researchers write about Nyeti's place of birth - you have surely not provided enough information to find such research. In summary, it reads like a grandiose but untrue biography of a high school student. Huon (talk) 19:59, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FRANCIS DE MIOMANDRE

I received notification that I should be submitting this to the Spanish Wikipedia language site. I'm submitting this article for a friend of mine and I have the technical part but he is the author. I would not be able to submit this to the Spanish Wikipedia, I don't speak or read Spanish well. Would you provide additional assistance in getting this published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelarkinjr (talk • contribs) 23:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's not in English, the draft is unsuitable for the English Wikipedia. Besides, we already have an article on Francis de Miomandre. Submitting it to the Spanish Wikipedia may therefore indeed be the way to go; it offers help on article creation at es:Wikiproyecto:Asistente para la creación de artículos.

The draft does not cite any sources, which are necessary both to allow our readers to verify the article's content and to establish the subject's notability. So if you intend to submit it to the Spanish Wikipedia, you will probably have to add some. And while I don't speak Spanish myself, a machine translation of the text appeared rather informal in style. For example, I wouldn't expect to see exclamation marks in encyclopedia articles except in quotes. Huon (talk) 00:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]