Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 October 3

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 3

Declined & Deleted article

Is it possible to get my denied article back in my sandbox so I can edit it for approval.

Or is there a way to find an offical Wiki editor to write the page from what i've submitted.

I'm a first time article submitter, my boss would like me to get this page up ASAP so any help would be appreciated.

The page was for Ralph Carr (www.ralphcarr.com)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ralph Carr (Manager) Laurenrcm (talk) 01:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Apparently your draft was declined because it violated copyright. All pages on Wikipedia, including sandboxes, must respect copyright. We therefore cannot restore a copyright violation. You can request permission from the copyright holder to release the content under a free license such as the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License, and when you send confirmation of the release to Wikipedia at "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org" (see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for an example release form), the now properly licensed content can be undeleted. But usually it's easier to just rewrite it.

Some general remarks: Firstly, you might want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing about your boss may be one such conflict. Secondly, all Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles. We need significant coverage in such sources, both to establish the subject's notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. Carr's website is obviously not independent, and since it probably doesn't have any editorial oversight nor a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, it's probably not reliable by Wikipedia's standards either. If your draft was a copy of that website, it would thus have to be rewritten anyway. Huon (talk) 02:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox

I just realized that the title of my submission was "sandbox" when it should be "SwiftKey". How can I update this? G what (talk) 02:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission wasn't really at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox (that page is a bizarre mess), but in your own sandbox at User:G what/sandbox. I moved it to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SwiftKey.

On an unrelated note, you should probably have another look at your references. Quite a few of them are primary or otherwise not reliable sources such as SwiftKey's own website or press releases, and while I personally enjoy xkcd, it doesn't really come with editorial oversight either. Huon (talk) 03:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Articles for creation/Kiba origins, structure, challenges and way forward

article

Introduction Kiba music; also known as Dinaka is not just an endangered art form from pre-colonial Africa but an important heritage in need of preservation and economic freedom. Thobela FM, a national radio station which broadcasts in the Northern Sotho medium is one of the few institutions with tangible historical archives of Kiba music dating back to the 20th century. The word Kiba is Northern Sotho for hit and is also the name of the biggest drum amongst the genre’s musical instruments. The following sections will explore the art form’s origin, structure and challenges as four critical elements which require further research on why Kiba music needs to be preserved and economically exploited for the benefit of its copyright owners. A way forward will be offered as part of a road map and proposed changes due for implementation. Origin Amongst other indigenous music genres, Kiba is one of the most underrated, ingenious art form that can only be found in selected parts of Southern Africa(in particular, the northern parts of South Africa in Limpopo province). It is a rich cultural art form that has been passed from generation to generation dating back to the 1700’s and has its copyright entrusted solely in the diverse rural populations of the Northern Sotho, Bapedi and BaVenda across vast regions. The matebele*, batau*, batloung*, bakwena*, bakone* to mention but a few, are some of the clan names synonymous with Kiba music ownership, composition, costumes and dance styles that differ from region to region. Structure According to historical perspective, Kiba music is known to have originated as a ‘male dominated art form’. As a musical band, it comprises of between eight to ten “pipe blowers”, one of them a leader (also known as a malokwane*) and three drum beaters. Interestingly, the drum beaters are seldom males. At least three females play a drum set consisting of a big drum called kiba*, a medium sized drum referred to “moropa wa diatla*” and two slightly identical small drums known as “ditinti*”. The cross gender element of women featured in the band makes Kiba music a cultural collective not only reserved for the senses of a single gender but the whole family. Challenges Despite the fact that DinakaKiba music is one of the oldest indigenous music genres in the world, the originators of this genre continue to ‘fall by the road side’ when it comes to packaging and marketing their products. In an attempt to challenge some of the stereotypes, most artists have resorted to using old tape recorders as the only way they can record, package and eventually sell their unfinished products. To add to the problem, this wonderful creation is then made available in volatile tape cassettes with a very low sound quality. For those recorded, marketing is still a huge obstacle. Besides, a lot of would be customers buy the music from these artists at a low price only to re-record, repackage(albeit without prior consent) and sell or export to far away markets where they would enjoy huge financial gains. Kiba music artists have inborn capabilities and skills in the preservation and development of rural heritage. They need to professionally perform at events, record, package and market quality Kiba music locally, regionally and internationally without having to suffer exploitation at the hands of unscrupulous vendors. With the participation of Kiba music groups at music festivals and cultural exhibitions locally and internationally, these artists would be able to share in the economic gains the art form has potential to generate. Way forward In today’s world more and more people hope to experience firsthand, the rich musical heritage that is found in Folk music such as Kiba. Empirical evidence shows people want to consume and get exposed to art forms not found in the mainstream music industry and media. Kiba music is loved by many for its uniqueness- a truly African and a spiritual item that has never been afforded large scale exposure and coverage. It is in this regard that we believe forming a working relationship with traditional institutions, government departments, private companies, investors, agents and music festival organizers locally, regionally and internationally will expose the art form to a larger audience as well as leverage Kiba music with mainstream music. Conclusion In a world where indigenous knowledge systems are in danger of being phased out by modern ways of living, Kiba music must find ways to survive. Its origins are indicative of the historical value and cultural significance that deserves to be restored and respected. There is also less literature written about this ancient musical art form. Therefore, more research is needed to ensure there is accurate and relevant information published on Kiba music for future generations.

Mahlaga (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Please don't post entire article submissions here. In addition, I can't find this article anywhere. Are you able to give us the exact page name? Mdann52 (talk) 10:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I expect this is supposed to be the submission itself. But since it's either unsourced or based on primary sources, copying it to Articles for creation/Kiba wouldn't really help. It'd have to be rewritten almost entirely. Huon (talk) 11:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TolumiDe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/TolumiDe I would like to get this AFC approved, thank You. 68.49.209.208 (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

While TolumiDE is probably notable enough for a Wikipedia article (as an aside, I believe you got the capitalization wrong), the article currently doesn't really show it. Bella Naija is a blog, not a reliable source. I expect MTV's hagiography wasn't subject to editorial oversight either. Her greatest success, the Nigeria Entertainment Award for Best Female R&B Artist, isn't even mentioned. Conversely, the claim that she is "known in the East Coast" is rather vague and not supported by the sources - even her name, Tolu Olumide, is unsourced.

In summary, the draft needs much better sources, it should more closely follow what those sources say about TolumiDE, and it should do a better job at highlighting her accomplishments. Huon (talk) 15:04, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Mark Schaefer Page

I am struggling with this entry Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mark Schaefer I don't understand why it is not neutral and why his two very successful books are not legitimate enough. I have cut down the article by half since I started. I would so much appreciate any insightful feedback on specific areas. I am really stuck. Thanks! Princetondt (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Take for example this statement: "He worked with global brands such as Anheuser-Busch, Coca-Cola, Heineken, Nestle, and received seven international patents for his R&D innovations." Says who? That's unsourced and sounds like name-dropping to make him sound important by association (and "for his R&D innovations" seems like an empty collection of buzzwords to me - what is it supposed to relate about those patents?). Many of the sources only drop his name without telling us anything about Schaefer himself. For example, the Forbes article "The Democratization of Social Influence" uses Schaefer to explore the issues, but devotes no more than half a sentence to Schaefer himself. Conversely, the "background" doesn't have any sources at all. The source about the conference he supposedly founded doesn't mention him, nor does the blog ranking (and being in the top 150 of 1,139 blogs isn't that much of an accomplishment anyway). Another couple of sources aren't reliable or not independent, such as his own books. Even his main claim to fame, about the "bestselling" books, is vague. Are both books bestsellers? The source mentions only one of them. Did they make the NYT bestseller list? When and for how long? Huon (talk) 19:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cloud Security Alliance

Hello. I am looking for some specific guidance on why this was not approved.

Included in this submission is a TON of external resources to support all the information provided. Guidance on what to do to get it accepted would be appreciated.

thank you - kari Kjritacco (talk) 18:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

There is indeed a ton of references, but firstly, they were very hard to read (I fixed that in a rather primitive way; you should use proper footnotes), secondly, they are even harder to find (basically I had to Google the title and hope that I could find the relevant result; they should have a link to the article if it's an online source, and enough bibliographical information to clearly identify the source), and thirdly, quite a few of them aren't the reliable independent sources we're looking for. For example, I probably didn't find the right page that was supposed to be the "Cloud Security Alliance Europe" source, but it sounds like the organization itself. Other unreliable sources include blogs and press releases.

Then there's the issue it was declined for: It reads like an advertisement. The mission statement isn't an auspicious beginning. Or take this statement: "CSA gained significant notoriety in 2011 when the White House selected the CSA Summit as the venue for announcing the federal government’s cloud computing strategy." Firstly, I'm not sure whether Dark Reading comes with the reputation for fact-checking and accuracy necessary to be considered reliable. Secondly, it doesn't say anything about CSA gaining notoriety anyway - that part is just made up to make the CSA sound more important.

In summary, you should provide bibliographical details about the references (publisher, author, date, link, ...) and use proper footnotes to make them readable. I've done so with the reference for the very last sentence to provide an example; see also WP:Referencing for beginners. You should get rid of references to unreliable sources. And you should make sure that the draft's content is indeed supported by the sources. The best sources would be those that don't just mention the CSA, but that focus on it. "Person X does something at a CSA conference" may be reliably sourced, but it doesn't really tell us much about the CSA. Huon (talk) 19:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cloud Security Alliance/Kari Walker

Hi. I have revised the article a good bit to include references. I am note sure if the edited version has come through. Can you let me know what else needs to be done to make this an acceptable WIKI? thanks, Kari

Kjritacco (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2012 (UTC) Cloud Security Alliance

Please don't paste a copy of your draft to this help desk whenever you ask a question. We can easily follow the link in the section heading and look at the draft itself. I'll just remove it so this help desk remains readable. While I'm on the subject of pasting copies of your draft: Instead of modifying the draft, you've added another two copies to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cloud Security Alliance. That's not really helpful; at worst the reviewer will accidentally review the wrong copy. Furthermore, your new copies ignored some of the improvements I had made to the original draft (such as the section headings and the lone footnote I had added as an example), and it's hard to tell whether you changed anything else or whether I could just merge your changes to the footnotes and my section headings into a coherent whole - apparently you did make other changes, and in order not to reverse them, I'll have to re-do my improvements by hand. I'll do so this once, but I won't be turned into Sisyphos.

The edited version (in fact, the two edited versions) have been saved and submitted for review. However, quite a few of the issues I listed above remain unresolved: You really should use footnotes, not just to make your draft comply to Wikipedia's standard style of referencing, but also to allow the introduction of additional references without messing up the numbering. See the example footnote I added for how it's done, or have a look at WP:Referencing for beginners for a more thorough explanation. And while you added links to most references, the biographical details are still missing (though by now it should be much easier to find those details). Furthermore, some of the references can now easily be seen to be inappropriate: As I said above, 5a doesn't say what it's cited for. Nos. 4, 24a and 33 are primary sources, the CSA's own website; nos. 7, 16, 18, 20, 29, 34, 36 and 38 are blogs and nos. 13 and 19 are press releases, neither of which are considered reliable. And that's just by looking at the URLs, not at the sources themselves. Yet other sources provide little more than a directory entry. All those references that aren't independent of the subject, aren't reliable or provide no significant information should be de-emphasized or gotten rid of, and you should make sure that the draft's text conforms to what the sources say. On the other hand, I'd expect an organization such as the CSA has received at least some mainstream news coverage; yet we don't have a single news source outside the tech world.

A final remark on links: External links are created by single square brackets: Code [http://www.google.com/ like this] will look like this. But links to other Wikipedia pages follow a subtly different pattern: They are created by double square brackets, they don't need the full URL but just the article title, and the display text (if the display text isn't just the article title) begins after a pipe: Code [[Google|like this]] will look like this and link to Wikipedia's Google article. I'll clean up the links you added up to now. Huon (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peter Ames Carlin

Hi,

I wrote an entry for a new page, but can't find the button to submit it for editing/consideration. I know I must be doing something wrong, but what? It's called 'Peter Ames Carlin,' because it's my profile (written straight-up, just-the-facts, etc), and it's got references, supporting materials, etc. Seems pretty above-board, no? But how do I submit it? I'm stumped.

Thanks, Peter Peteramescarlin (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The draft has been successfully submitted for review; as long as there's a "review waiting" message and it's categorized among the pending AfC submissions, everything is ok in that regard. The "currently not submitted for review" message is a relic that can be ignored; a bot should remove it soon (and it doesn't impede the review anyway).

However, there are several other issues. First of all, you might want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest; writing an WP:Autobiography is strongly discouraged. Furthermore, we require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to establish it's notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Basically, we don't need your own writings, but others writing about you. Then there are issues of verifiability and peacock terms: For example, "Carlin was also an early and influential advocate for TV series" - says who? What kind of influence did you have? And was the NYT article on The Jackpot in Television's Future really a cover story? It doesn't look like something I'd expect on the cover of a national newspaper, and it certainly doesn't say so (of course the article is not an independent source anyway). Amazon trying to sell your books isn't quite a reliable independent source either - have there been independent reviews in newspapers or literary magazines that we could cite?

Currently the draft is not fit for publication, and it might be best not to write it yourself but to wait until someone else does so. Huon (talk) 00:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)