Help desk
< September 12	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 14 >

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.

September 13

Review of User:Marcusrastus/sandbox

The article draft in question is in the style of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Jingera Trilogy. My query relates to the references, which look fine to me in the Sandbox but there is an error message in the Preview and I cannot see why. Please advise. Marcusrastus (talk) 00:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of a named reference is that you must provide the reference in full the first time you use it, for instance <ref name="ClarkBlanche">http://blancheclark.example.org</ref> and then any subsequent re-use needs just one self-closing tag like <ref name="ClarkBlanche"/> (with the / at the end) because all of the info was already provided the first time you cited that named source. For this to work, the first use must be there with all the info, otherwise the subsequent attempts to cite the same source can't find that named tag and give errors. Also, in the ==References== section of your article, just put {{reflist}}. No need to manually list individual references again, as those are generated automatically from the <ref> tags in your article. I've made the change and the error went away. K7L (talk) 01:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cloud office

I submit an article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cloud office, but it is declined due to "lack reliable resources". It's the first time for me to create articles in Wikipedia, hoping experienced creators would give me some hints. Thanks all

zhangjin (talk) 03:18, 13 September 2012 (UTC)Zhjinsz[reply]

In simple terms, we need references to reliable sources (see WP:RS), newspapers, magazines, websites, etc., that talk about your subject "Cloud Office". This to prove that Cloud Office is a notable subject worthy of inclusion in the Wikipedia (see WP:GNG), and also to verify {see WP:V) that in information in your article is accurate. Your first and last references appear to be broken. The second and third reference do not mention Cloud Office at all. Therefore you do not have any reliable sources. -- :- ) Don 13:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, it looks like we have an article on cloud computing. I'd tried an on-line search to see if ZhuCloud, the specific product advertised in the proposed article on "Cloud office" is notable but it appears not to be (I only get irrelevant results). The article appears to be promoting a point of view that applications currently on the desktop should be moved to outside servers. It needs to be WP:NEUTRAL and merely present balanced facts without advocating for either group of vendors. K7L (talk) 13:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The MEDIS Study

Hello! I am the Head of the MEDIS study and i am trying to upoload an article describing the study design and aims... ofcourse, as the study has more than 30 publications in medical journals in all these papers the design and aims has been presented. But the papers are not free of charge ,and are not an encyclopedia and does not have the reputation that Wikipedia has ... So, can you pls delete, modify whatever you want in my article in order to be OK for citing it in Wikipedia. Thank you in advance.

Demosthenes B. Panagiotakos, DrMed, FRSPH, FACE
Associate Professor in Biostatistics-Epidemiology of Nutrition Director, Graduate Studies

Dept of Nutrition and Dietetics
Harokopio University of Athens
70 Eleftheriou Venizelou Str.
17671 Athens, Greece
Tel. <redacted>
Fax. <redacted>

http://www.tmimadiaitologias.hua.gr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbpanag (talk • contribs) 07:15, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That would be wonderful. I think the people you need to see are at WikiSource. You will need to provide information for the copyright release. The copyright policy page is here and the help pages are here. Thanks very much for your offer. -- :- ) Don 13:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kristina Pimenova

Kristina, is a cute little girl who borned in Moskow, Russia, she borned om 27 of december in 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.211.62.191 (talk) 14:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That draft is empty, and I doubt a four-year-old girl is notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Are there any independent reliable sources discussing her in some detail? Huon (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ben Lewin

To whom it may concern. I tried to create an article for the award-winning international director of recently renewed Sundance/TIFF fame BEN LEWIN but the reviewer denied it publishing on the grounds that the person wasn't notable enough. I find it bizarre that I linked to a handful of preexisting wiki articles on films that he wrote and directed in my article, yet the writer/director himself wasn't notable enough. Please allow the page to go up, or make the page yourself. He has a film coming out in October called The Sessions. (Odl1991 (talk) 15:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Wikipedia's basic notability criterion is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and coverage should be based on such reliable secondary sources. The sources provided are not reliable (such as IMDb or blogs), not independent (such as his film company's website), or they provide only trivial coverage (such as the books on British emigrees or Rotten Tomatoes). Notability is not inherited; it's entirely possible to be a director of notable movies without being notable. Right now the reliable sources don't even confirm the basic biographical facts. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper coverage of Lewin himself (as opposed to his movies). Huon (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I have references to the LA times, and if you look on google, multiple other newspapers have written about him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odl1991 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The LA Times piece seems to be an opinion piece (the URL even calls it a blog), not an article, which is much less reliable because there's no editorial oversight - in fact, opinion pieces are often held to be reliable sources only for the commenter's opinion. If multiple other newspapers have written about Lewin, please base your draft on those sources. Huon (talk) 05:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dr. Peter Allen

Is my article up for review ????

Shawna McNicol 74.198.87.48 (talk) 16:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is, but there's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and it may take some time until yours is reviewed again. Please be patient. In the meantime, you could improve the draft by adding inline citations and footnotes to clarify which of the references supports which of the article's statements. See also WP:Referencing for beginners. Huon (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chris Grainger

Hello, I am still awaiting confirmation of publication on the above article - it has been 8 days. Is there anything I can do to help this situation? Many thanks. (Mr Rabbit8 (talk) 18:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

The article is awaiting review, but there's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and it may take some time until yours is reviewed again. Please be patient. You can continue improving the article during the wait (and thereby improve its chances of being accepted); for example, Facebook and YouTube are usually not considered reliable sources. But there's nothing you can do to speed up the review itself. Huon (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yankee Pasha

There exists an entry under the name of "Yankee Pasha" in Wikipedia. It is about the film titled "Yankee Pasha". Since this film is directly based on a novel with the same name, I decided to add a new entry for the book and linking both. However, my entry was not accepted and declined on 1 September without taking into consideration my afore mentioned explanation.

I didn't mind and enriched the entry but this new version is not being reviewed by any editor authorized to accept new articles. What needs to be done ?

Best Regards,

THEWISEOLDTURK (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the book doesn't appear to be notable. It doesn't inherit the film's notability, but must have received significant coverage of its own. Most of your references provide only trivial coverage, and some of the others are not reliable. The best of the bunch seems to be the Saturday Review article, but that's currently cited almost as much for its own existence as for what it says about the book, and "significant coverage" is usually interpreted as "more than one good source". If you could dig up more of the positive reviews mentioned in the draft and base the article on what they have to say, that would greatly improve the draft. It's currently awaiting another review, but since there's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, that may take some time. Huon (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chandrika Balan

Dear Sir/Madam

Many thanks for your support and cooperation. I wanted to add the picture of Chandrika Balan to the article which is now appearing in the Wikipedia. I notice that many of the people in Wikipedia has their picture also on the right hand side box. I have the picture but do not know how to upload. It is the picture she has sent to me.

Could you kindly guide me.

thanks and regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panank (talk • contribs) 21:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, since the article on Chandrika Balan has been accepted long ago, this is technically the wrong help desk. Next time, please use either the general help desk or maybe ask at the Teahouse, which specializes in help for new editors.

Ms. Balan supposedly holds the copyright to the image. If she is willing to release it under a free license (such as the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License), it can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. You must provide proof of the image's license by contacting the people at OTRS per email (their address is "permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org"). See the example release form for what to tell them.

If the copyright holder of the image is unwilling to release it under a free license, it cannot be used on Wikipedia. For living persons such as Chandrika Balam it is assumed that a free equivalent exists or could be produced (say, by photographing her in public), which precludes the use of non-free images. Huon (talk) 23:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]