Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 November 3
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 2 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 4 > |
| 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. |
November 3
[edit]To whom it may concern: I am having trouble understanding what is meant by 'independent sources' regarding the article I am attempting to create: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elizabeth Van Wie Davis. Thank you so much for your help and time!
Very Respectfully, Je 1847 (talk) 00:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)Je 1847
- "Independent sources" are sources that are independent of the article's subject - in particular, sources not written by her or her close associates. This concerns the vast majority of the draft's sources. Disregarding Wikipedia links for a moment (Wikipedia doesn't consider itself a reliable source), we have eleven references to publications by Davis, three to documents and websited hosted by her employer the Colorado School of Mines (which are presumably influenced or written outright by Davis, and even if they weren't her employer would likely still be biased in her favor), and one to the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies which according to that document included Davis among its faculty at that time. That's fifteen out of sixteen. The last one, the China Review International review of her book, is truly independet, but it's not enough to base an article on. To be considered notable by Wikipedia's standards, she must have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable independent sources - definitely more than just one book review. Maybe she received some newspaper coverage, perhaps on the occasion of her awards? Huon (talk) 01:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Duke Forum for Law & Social Change
Hi,
I am not sure what third party sources I can provide for this article. It is one of the nine law journals at Duke Law School. All other journals have Wikipedia pages but this one currently does not. A list of all law journals at Duke, including the Duke Forum for Law and Social Change can be found here: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/journals/
All of my sources cited are on Duke Law School's webpage. This is a reliable third party source. Is there some other source that I can provide which might help this page get published? Thank you!
Sincerely, Shamoor Anis Shamoor (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
- The Duke Law School is not a third-party source on its own journal. The other Duke law journal articles (or at least those I had a look at) are also in a sorry state, but while other insufficiently sourced articles exist, that's no reason to create more. For a well-sourced article on a law journal, have a look at the Harvard Law Review: Sources include the New York Times, the Boston Globe, CBS News, the Journal Citation Reports and two books published with reputable publishers. Those are third-party sources. Huon (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:JordanJAH/sandbox
[edit]Hello, I recently submitted an article for confirmation/release, however couldn't figure out how to change the title. Currently the article is sitting in my sandbox as "User:JordanAH/sandbox" but the actual article will be titled: Christopher J. Howell.
Not sure how this will affect the confirmation but wanted to make you aware.
Thank you, Jordan JordanJAH (talk) 23:58, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
- I have moved the draft to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Christopher J. Howell, the preferred location for drafts and the correct title. I've also left a message with a link to the new title at your sandbox; you can remove that message and re-use the sandbox whenever you want.
- However, I noticed that your draft doesn't cite any sources. Wikipedia requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, both to establish its notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. Without such sources we cannot accept the submission. Maybe Howell has been the subject of newspaper coverage?
- As an aside, I was rather surprised by the prominent mention of Howell's international travels. Is that really important enough to be mentioned in what the lead section?
- There was also this statement: "With more than two decades of industry experience Howell brings to the table a wealth of proven tactics that help others reach their destiny." It sounds good, but what exactly is it supposed to tell the reader, beyond his 20+ years of experience? It would probably have to be reworded or removed lest the draft is considered to be unduly promoting its subject. Huon (talk) 02:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)