Help desk
< October 9	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 11 >

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.

October 10

Thanks again Matthew

I'm glad I tried, Regards, Elustondo (talk) 04:17, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Astrostatistics Association

This is my first attempt at creating an article, although I have edited some. I am about to forget doing anything again. I have been trying to write an article on the International Astrostatistics Association, an organization of several hundred astronomers and statisticians from around the world. It was denied again - this time for a reason that makes no sense to me. The claim by the person rejecting it is that I did not give references. However, if they had checked I provided the best references possible. I went to the actual website of the association, and websites where the association is mentioned as well. There are no better references to obtain for this article, and are better than many of the articles I looked at when trying to determine how a reviewer could believe that references were not made, or not realiable. The primary site is an academic website sponsored by a university under a grant. How in the worls is this not a reference, or not realiable. I am totally frustrated since it appears that every part of the article is referenced and has support from the actual web site of the organization or by people in it. It is a restructuring of a global organization which has been in existence since 2009. Your help is requested. I've spent hours trying to get this correct. I would like to write a number of articles on subjects related to statistics and other related areas, but this experience has caused me to reconsider. The first denial was for a good reason I think, from Snowy Susan, but after correcting it I get a new denial from somewone else for an entrely dfferent reason, and one that makes no sense to me. My primar reference was https://asaip.psu.edu/organizations/iaa/international-astrostatistics-association-overview/view which is on the Astrostatistics and Astroinformatics Portal sponsored by Penn State. This is a site set up for hosting other smaller astrostatistics working groups as well. Brownstat (talk) 07:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. We require significant coverage in such sources both to establish a topic's notability and to allow our readers to verify the content. Unfortunately none of your sources are independent: Most are the organization's own web pages, some are the websites of closely related organizations, one is an article written by the IAA's president. Furthermore, they often do not say what they're cited for; for example, http://isi.cbs.nl/committees.htm doesn't say the IAA was founded in August 2012 by the Astrostatistics Committee and Network, https://asaip.psu.edu/organizations/iaa/international-astrostatistics-association-overview doesn't mention the presidents-elect (at least not in that capacity), http://www.isi2013.hk/en/index.php doesn't even mention the IAA, and so on.

If there are indeed no better references to be had, then the IAA is not (yet) notable enough for a Wikipedia article. That's not all that surprisig since the organization seems rather new. It might be best to wait until secodary sources become available, such as newspaper coverage or articles about the IAA in the journals of the astronomical and mathematical societies. As an aside, other insufficiently sourced articles exist, but that's no reason to create more. Each submission must stand on its own merits. Huon (talk) 12:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Henrik Wenøe

When saving the article at hand Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Henrik Wenøe the last 6 sections of the article disappear. When reentering editing, they reappear?!

What should I do to retain the last 6 sections of the article in the final format?

Jesperbp (talk) 09:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When this happens, it usually means you have an unclosed <ref>. You can see my repair here. Happy editing. -- :- ) Don 09:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To add to Dcshank's comment: if you have a <ref> tag and don't put in a </ref> tag at the other end of the footnote, the programming thinks everything following that is a footote until it finds another </ref> tag somewhere. So that's probably the single most common reason for having text disappear from the visible screen even though it shows up in code. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sardar vallabh Bhai Patel PG College

Sardar vallabh Bhai Patel PG College is situated at Viratnager near by Jaipur The Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel PG college has spread its wings to cover most of India and also has a presence in every continent of the planet. Our College is fully active in association with the Education, Culture & Sports Activities. There will be educational, cultural and vocational programs organized for that area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.14.93 (talk) 09:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to write an article, please use the Article Wizard. See also our notabity guideline and our policy on verifiability: Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Huon (talk) 12:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Flippa

Hey! Not sure if I added the references corrected and the whole text isn't showing up when I click preview. Can you help? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Flippa&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.84.156 (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Im not sure how to submit it for review. Pretty much lost and wondering through Wiki help pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6045:D6:150A:F84A:503D:CEED (talk) 17:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have exactly the same problem as asked two sections above you at Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Henrik Wenøe. Not saying you shouldn't have asked, just noting it's a common problem. Please glance above at the advice there, and let us know if you have any further questions.

Since you're writing about a company, I'd strongly suggest you read the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) to ensure you see the checklist of "must haves" to publish the article. Also, you look to be pretty new to formatting, so I'd suggest you check out Wikipedia:Writing your first article to understand some of the basics of how to make a section heading, etc. Lastly, and not picking on you here, just trying to advise in advance what to work on, an article with promotional phrases like "number one marketplace for buying and selling websites in the world" is not going to get published, because unless it is literally the largest seller, or award-winning-est seller, and you have specific neutral citations to document that, it's just WP:Advertising and will not get published. Happy to help you here, just setting realistic expectations since there are a lot of people trying to use Wikipedia as web-hosting or advertising space for their web properties, so the editors here are pretty vigilant on not letting that happen. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for getting back to me Matthew. I changed the headline of course and I did see the above questions and changed the < formatting, but it didn't help any. Can you let me know if I did the formatting correctly? I do know that they have pretty stringent company requirements, so I tried to have a ton of references on it, but they seem to be my problem. Also, it says you need to have 4 section headings for it to auto-format. I can't figure out what I am doing wrong with it. Thanks for all of your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.84.156 (talk) 20:29, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, the only significance to "four section headings" is that an article with that many sections on a MediaWiki site gets a table of contents automatically inserted after the introduction. Other than that, I doubt that number has any special significance.

You need to close <ref> tags with </ref> tags. Using <ref>...some reference...<ref> does *not* work and causes everything after the improperly-closed tag to not display. Adding section headings requires the heading be on its own line, surrounded by equal signs, ie: == Heading== or === Subheading === . To link to an article already on Wikipedia, put the name of the page in two sets of square brackets, for instance [[ Wikipedia ]] for Wikipedia's article about itself. Do not use the full external link format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia unless you're linking between different websites (instead of internally). K7L (talk) 23:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done and proper now. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.84.156 (talk) 23:40, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

wordlessness, Amenic Film

Italic text

i would appreciate your reasons for elimination of the forementioned articles; Amenic Film and Wordlessness

as i indicated both subjects have been registered, addresed and announced in the nets as well, but i guess we just wait when further information comes through for both and then, perhapsthen others register them both again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kajox (talk • contribs) 20:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, as noted in the text of the Decline boxes posted above your article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amenic Cinema, your article was declined for not providing WP:Sourcing. This is not a judgement on the validity of your topic, it's that you haven't given us any evidence that "Amenic Cinema" is a recognised concept.

Please review WP:Reliable sources for examples of the kind of evidence we need. Maybe a magazine about filmmaking published an article on the subject? Maybe a scholarly publication on emerging arts had a paper about it? Do any books about the art of filmmaking discuss the "Amenic" concept? What this comes down to is we require evidence that a body of people recognise the term and its importance. Not just anecdotally, like some YouTube clips and blog comments, but evidence that there's significant currents of discussing this issue in the film world. Please review "reliable sources" and also WP:Notability if you have questions, or let us know if you have further questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia:Articles for creation/calcium nitrite

Hello! I have written a wikipedia article and it will not lend me submit it for review..it will appear in my screen a sign saying already not submitted for review... what am I doing wrong? I need if possible that it will be published this week.. Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saioa oscoz (talk • contribs) 21:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was a rather subtle issue: There were <ref> tags without a closing </ref> tag, and everything afterwards, including the submission template, was considered part of the reference. I fixed that; the draft is now submitted for review. It still carries the "currently not submitted for review" message, but that's by now an outdated relic; as long as there's a "review waiting" message and it's categorized among the pending AfC submissions (the very last line), everything is OK.

However, the submission process is currently massively backlogged; I don't think we'll review it this week. Even if we did we'd currently probably have to decline the submission because the references are not the reliable sources we need. They mostly look like chemical company websites, none of which are likely to have editorial oversight or a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. For comparison, have a look at our calcium nitrate article and its sources: Publications in peer-reviewed academic journals and trade journals, and chemistry textbooks. In particular, Wolfgang Laue, Michael Thiemann, Erich Scheibler, Karl Wilhelm Wiegand “Nitrates and Nitrites” in Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 2002, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim sounds like it should be a good source for this article as well. Huon (talk) 21:34, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]