Help desk
< October 23	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 25 >

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 24

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

what determines when certain tests can be reported as a panel what specific directions are given — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.126.227 (talk) 01:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Pol430 talk to me 17:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sigma Kappa Chi

May I know the specific reasons as to why this article was not accepted? Please and thank you. Sigmakappachi (talk) 04:46, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The specific reason is that your article submission provided no references to verify the information presented and to evidence the notability of the topic. Click on the links in the explanations at the top of the submission to learn more. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DJ Maysin

I am DJ Maysin himself I understand you would love to have a Wikipedia page about me and my accomplishments, I tried to make one quickly as im on tour headlining for tens of thousands of people and it was rejected because I pasted material directly from my website http://DjMaysin.com which I own 100%. If there is anyway you could edit and make it acceptable or even go as far as to create one for me since you work for Wikipedia and im so busy with my busy life as a celebrity. Thank You so much. DJ Maysin (CEO and OWNER of UMG Music Group) 757.727.302598.141.36.69 (talk) 07:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can see no reason for Wikipedia to have a page about you, enjoy your tour. Pol430 talk to me 17:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Burkard Schliessmann

Hello, dear ladies and gentlemen, we created the article about the pianist and concert artist Burkard Schliessmann. Unfortunately, it was rejected. Where is the problem? Please could you help as quick as possible? Many thanks, Joanna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joanna at EVP (talk • contribs) 07:24, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The issues with this submission are explained at the top of the submission. Also click the links in the explanations for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:20, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. But this doesn't help us. Please could you do some examples for correction which work out? Many thanks, Joanna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joanna at EVP (talk • contribs) 10:46, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what an "example for correction" is. You can find a list of Good Articles about musicians, to use as examples to work from, at Wikipedia:Good articles/Music. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It already would help us, if you could explain how it technically works out with the "citations/references": When we make, for example, some citations with the upper numbers 1, 2, 3 and so on in a text: This we know, but how does it work when one clicks on this numbers that one jumps down in the <list of references> to the mentioned numbers (for example inj the article about Diana Krall)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joanna at EVP (talk • contribs) 11:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is explained in the Referencing for Beginners link that I directed you to previously. I suggest you try using one of the three methods listed on that page, to create an inline citation to a source. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, now we have finished the article and added the necessary references in details. Please could you have a look wether we could submit it in this form and manner? Thank you so much, best, Joanna--Joanna at EVP (talk) 17:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have now answered this further down the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Eustace

Hi there,

I submitted my article on photographer David Eustace for review and got some great detailed feedback that I can get to work on ASAP. However, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding one part of the feedback in regards to sources: "A lot of the sources are from his own website, or websites associated with him - clients, organizations, etc. What we need are reliable secondary sources - more like the press coverage, and it has to be expansive, not just one little mention of him." I understand now that using his website isn't deemed a reliable source, but why are clients' websites not deemed reliable? If someone could take a quick scan of the References section of the page and let me know which of those are problematic so I can edit those out, I'd really appreciate it. - Naomiberry (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues with clients' websites. Firstly, they usually are not subject to any editorial oversight and thus are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. Secondly, have you ever seen anybody's client write, "We hired John Doe, who is at best mediocre, but at least he was cheap"? Unfortunately most of your references seem problematic. In order:

I have no idea what http://anthropologie.iancoyle.com is. There's no indication it's written by Trevor Lunn as claimed, and even if it were, I don't think a fashion brand's Creative Director's comment on a random website is a reliable assessment of a photographer's qualities.
Scotland.org is an advocacy organization using Eustace's work to promote Scotland. It's not a reliable source, certainly not an unbiased source on people helping them with their advocacy.
Alumni pages also are more a matter of promotion than accurate information, especially when it's about "honorary graduates" - there's no editorial oversight, and it's at best the equivalent of a press release.
The Guardian would usually be a reliable source, except this is "sponsored content" paid for by Panasonic. Of course they provide a one-sidedly positive profile of the person they chose to build their ad campaign around.
MTP apparently is an ad agency Eustace works for. I'm unsurprised that they provide positive biographies of the people whose services they try to get paid for.
Katja Maas is another of Eustace's ex-employers, personally responsible by hiring him. By praising Eustace she indirectly praises her own choice.
Panasonic has an obvious interest in claiming, "the world's best photographers prefer our cameras". They're not a reliable source on the qualities of the people they hire for their ad campaigns.
Noorderlicht doesn't write so much as a single sentence about Eustace. That's not significant coverage. Also, if the exhibition catalogue is the only source for the fact that Eustace's work was shown there, it cannot have been that important an event in the first place.
More Scotland.org with exactly the same issues as the first time around.
Another advocacy organization Eustace works for. Their content about him is written by Eustace himself. If no one else bothered to write about them, Eustace's philanthropy, no matter how laudable, isn't significant enough to be mentioned by us.
And the university again.

What I'd expect are newspaper articles (independent articles, not ones sponsored by Eustace's employer) or articles in reputable magazines on photography or art that cover Eustace in some detail. Not one of your sources is reliable and free of close social or financial ties to Eustace. Huon (talk) 17:58, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP

Hello - I revised and resubmitted an article for creation on October 3, but I don't have a message or anything stating that it is awaiting review. I am wondering whether I submitted it correctly, and if so, how far it is backlogged? Thank you. Eavsec (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Eavsec: It's a good thing that you asked, because your article actually wasn't submitted. While editing, you removed the pink decline box that had the submit button on it. I have put it back, but don't click on it yet, because it will be declined because it doesn't have any references to independent sources such as news reports, magazine article, books, etc., to verify the information. With such a large firm, it shouldn't be hard to find some press coverage. Please add these reference and then click on the "Submit" button. Good luck! —Anne Delong (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James L. Koutoulas Esq.

Hello,

We have been very appreciative of the feedback from most of the Wiki volunteers and have changed our submission to reflect their suggestions. The new submission is very well documented with footnotes legitimate sources. However, the most recent feedback we got was "Feels like a coatrack attack on MF Global. Not inclined to promote to mainsapce for this reason."

This sounds like an opinion, which they are entitled to, but the fact of the matter is, that this is factual information that really happened. Mr. Koutoulas played a major role in the MF Global Bankruptcy (the 8th biggest bankruptcy in US History) and thus should be in the main space for that reason alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/James_L._Koutoulas_Esq.

Any feedback would be appreciated how to resolve this issue and get this submission accepted. Thanks for your help! CommodityCustomerCoalition (talk) 16:40, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The writing style is the main barrier to creation. The submission needs to be re-writen to comply with WP:NPOV. The article should be presented in a manner similar to an academic textbook rather than a piece of journalism. Pol430 talk to me 20:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Netsua

Hello,

I have been working on my Wikipedia page for about 4 months now, and I have submitted it twice after being told that I needed more references. I guess what I'm trying to say is, do you have to be famous to get accepted on Wikipedia?

Thanks Again for your time. ~Austin B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.116.231 (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not famous exactly. What you need is significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, such as newspapers or magazines. It appears that you don't have enough coverage (yet?) to satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guideline or the more specific guideline for musicians. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 20:24, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]