Help desk
< October 10	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 12 >

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 11

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/89 Combat Flying School

Good day, Yesterday, I submitted an article [1] and it got rejected, you pointed out that the official website should not be used and I should find independent sources. The source I used was www.saairforce.co.za which you have mistaken for the official website, www.saairforce.co.za is 100% independent from the South African Air Force and is compiled by an independent author. The official South African Air Force websit is www.af.mil.za which I did not use at all. Can you recheck the article or will I have to Resubmit? Thanks

Nathan121212 (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Elledge

I submitted an article for review yesterday, and I was alerted it would take 3 weeks to hear back. Then, about 12 hours later I get an email saying the article was declined, but with no explanation as to why.

Can someone help me understand why?

Thanks.

Teamelledge (talk) 13:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the submission being declined was given in some detail on the submission page itself - Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Elledge. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, Anne Delong left a lengthy explanation below the "Submission declined" box as to why it was reviewed and declined. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Teamelledge: you may have wondered why your article was reviewed so quickly. The reviewers in Wikiproject Articles for creation are all volunteers, and each one has his or her own areas of expertise. Sometimes for complicated submissions, such as mathematics or biology, for example, we have to reach out to other groups within the Wikipedia community for advice, which takes time. However, there are certain basic problems that a lot of first time submissions have that most of our reviewers recognize right away. If one of us happens to read a submission and feels that he or she knows just what advice to give, there seems little point in making the submitter wait three weeks, especially of they are going to have to submit again. Submissions that are getting closer to being acceptable, or need expert attention, usually remain in the queue longer. That's why the banner says "up to three weeks". Also, because the backlog is so large right now, we've called in extra volunteers to review the submissions, because no one really wants to wait for three weeks! —Anne Delong (talk) 20:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Gopichand Lagadapati

Hi there, I have created an article which have been processed and approved to be moved into article category. I have randomly started to write article and learned many things in the process on how to write and submit an article in wiki. I have made many changes to the article before i settled and understood how to write.My request to wiki is to delete all old articles and keep the last updated version of this article.I want to save the space in wiki by deleting older versions. I want to keep a clean copy of the article. Looking forward. Thanks, Rock.C.Mathew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrangers heart (talk • contribs) 16:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Astrangers heart . Any draft where you are the main author and want to delete, just paste the code {{db-self}} at the top of the page and it'll get taken care of. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Grand Lodge of Cyprus

I have been working on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Grand Lodge of Cyprus, and with the exception of a few photos and references, it's about ready to go to formal Wiki review.

Prior to this, I would like to show it to a couple of friends for editorial comment. How may I release it to show them, while not releasing it to the general public? (I don't care that people see it, but wish to follow Wikipedia's rules on this)

Further, have I put this together in the right spot? Should it be in my sandbox, or is this Talk page correct? Since starting the article I have been working on other pages, and have learned a lot about editing, and this occured to me to ask. Jax MN (talk) 17:51, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, submissions that have been tagged as being candidates for going through the AfC process will wind up on "Wikipedia talk" at some point. (Why it's there is for archaic reasons and reviewers would like it to change, but that's another conversation) As it is, your article is very likely to be declined because it is largely unreferenced. Please read Citing sources and Referencing for beginners and ensure that the majority, if not all, of your article is referenced to reliable sources. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--ahmed 20:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC)ahmed khamoor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed habeeb hamed khamoor (talk • contribs)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/June Julian (2)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/June Julian I replaced the internal website URLs with wikilinks URLs that I copied from Wikipedia, but when clicked,those links say no wikipedia page exists for those places when in fact they do--Lincolnspencer (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC).Lincolnspencer (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lincolnspencer , two things:

It's saying that because you have an extra "/" at the end, which it's mis-reading as part of the title, thus the failure to link.
Secondly, you don't need to code [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_University/ New York University], just type [[New York University]] and it will appear as New York University.

All good? MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]