Help desk
< October 6	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 8 >

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 7

RE: Inquiring as to the reason the Skidboot wikipedia article was rejected.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Skidboot

Your resistance to accept Oprah.com, news articles and media segments as notable and not reliable sources is perplexing, but will make for great addition to the back-story once the movie is completed.

Skidboot (talk) 13:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be misconstruing my words. News articles with editorial oversight are definitely reliable sources. "Media segments" may be just about anything; much would depend on the particulars. See WP:Identifying reliable sources for details. The Oprah Winfrey Show, on the other hand, doesn't have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy; guests on that show have said all kinds of nonsense. If someone told you: "It's true, I saw it on Oprah!", wouldn't you ask for a more reliable corroboration? Anyway, the issue has been discussed in the past, and consensus was that Oprah is definitely not a reliable source. See this assessment. Huon (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can spare 8 minutes and watch the Skidboot youtube link, I think you will understand where I am coming from. Oprah is merely one source, not from an article, but from her show. The dog performs live on the show as seen in this Texas Country Reporter segment which is a compilation of Skidboot's entire performance career.

Skidboot The Amazing Dog http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2BfzUIBy9A

Then we can just as well cite the Texas Country Reporter for the fact that the dog appeared on Oprah and need not bother with the show itself. I didn't see any mention of the film in the segment, though. Huon (talk) 19:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Don Flye (Tennis)

I wanted to thank the two individuals that have responded to my posts! I apologize for my oversight(s)on my part. I have question on external links where the link goes to the website but once there you will need to go to particular tabs within the link to see that the individual is in listed. For example the first link USTA Boys. Once you go into the link, you then have to hit the history tab and the name of the person is there. Is there a way to link directly to the page where the name is or another way to denote the existence in the article? I will remove the Wikipedia linkages but am having trouble finding a Wimbleton reference on the web other than the Wiki portion. I will try and locate a book or newspaper article. I also wanted to understand why the link to the Tacoma Hall of Fame is not acceptable as a reference (last citing)??

Thanks again for the help! Kflyeapple (Kflyeapple (talk) 16:21, 7 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

The USTA Boys website seems to be tricky; I'm in no way a HTML expert, but I found no way to directly link to the correct tab. My suggestion would be to try and clarify that on our end, for example by denoting the link as "USTA Boys Tournament History: Past Winners".

The problem with the Tacoma Hall of Fame is that it's not a secondary source: It's the Tacoma Athletic Commission listing its own Hall of Fame. Would anybody outside Tacoma care about that Hall of Fame? If yes, we should find a secondary source mentioning that Flye made the list. If not, why should we? Huon (talk) 19:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the page and all the tabs are imbedded in one page as script with no anchors. So, "no" it can not be linked directly. Use Huon's suggestion. It should be fine. -- :- ) Don 20:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narcissus (Film 2012)

Hi,

I have started creating the page, using other templates. However, for some reason, the page is still showing languages, as listed below. How can I make it work? I would appreciate if you could help me fix it. I am a newbie here, so I have a hard time fixing the code or scripts..

Thank you!

ca: Narcissus (2012 film) cs: Narcissus (2012 film) cy: Narcissus (2012 film) da: Narcissus (2012 film) de: Narcissus (2012 film) es: Narcissus (2012 film) eu: Narcissus (2012 film) fr: Narcissus (2012 film) gl: Narcissus (2012 film) hr: Narcissus (2012 film) id: Narcissus (2012 film) it: Narcissus (2012 film) la: Narcissus (2012 film) hu: Narcissus (2012 film) mk: Narcissus (2012 film) nl: Narcissus (2012 film) ja: スイセン no: Narcissus (2012 film) pl: Narcissus (2012 film) pt: Narcissus (2012 film) ru: Нарцисс (фильм) sk: Pianista (film) sh: Narcissus (2012 film) fi: Narcissus (2012 film) sv: Narcissus (2012 film) tr: Narcissus (2012 film) uk: Нарцис (фільм) vi: Narcissus (2012 film) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gasikest (talk • contribs) 18:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed those links to other language Wikipedias. While I was at it, I also modified the categories: Now you'll see the categories at the bottom of the draft, but the draft is not itself contained in the categories any more. That will be reversed once the draft has been accepted, but drafts should not (yet) be contained in article categories. Huon (talk) 19:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peter Prior (Gulumba)

Hi Could I ask how I go about actually getting this page created?

Aaron1975 (talk) 19:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was a problem with the reference tags that prevented the page from being properly submitted. I fixed that; it's now awaiting review. Huon (talk) 19:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Brianmbarney/sandbox

I would like to get my post approved - could you detail in simple English what I need to do?

Thanks,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brianmbarney/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianmbarney (talk • contribs) 19:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently there's already another draft on the same subject at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Learning Tools Interoperability. Instead of having us deal with two different drafts, you should edit that one and improve it. However, currently neither draft shows evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles or reviews in trade magazines. Such coverage is necessary to establish LTI's notability. Huon (talk) 20:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same editor same article... Deleting sandbox. -- :- ) Don 20:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FragRadio

Hi There,

I can't seem to see how i can get this article live onto the website. I click on "If this submission is ready to be reviewed, click here and press Save page" and it takes me to make a new section.. please could you help me in getting this article live please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FragRadio (talk • contribs) 19:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you save that new section, it will add a submission template to the bottom of the draft. You can also submit it manually by adding {{subst:submit}} (if you do it manually, I'd suggest placing it at the very top of the draft). However, the draft currently does not cite any secondary sources. We need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles, both to establish FragRadio's notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. If you submit the draft for review in its current state, it will be declined. Huon (talk) 20:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]