Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 September 13
| 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
[edit]Hello,
With regards to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sanford Panitch,
As we are awaiting review of this article - two questions; can we keep updating and adding to it before the review process begins and, if we decide not to go ahead and post it as is after the review (assuming it's accepted), how do we pull it from the review process?
Thanks!
Panitchassistant (talk) 04:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Yes you can carry on updating and adding to the submission at any time, and this will not affect the review process.
- You may benefit from reading WP:COI. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I have recently been working on an article for creation which was denied because 'Many stylistic and procedural faults prevent this submission from seriously being considered.' I would highly appreciate it if you could guide through specifically what needs to be corrected to have this article approved.
Thank you,
Zakirmaq
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Boris Bidjan Saberi
Zakirmaq (talk) 10:33, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- The vast majority of the biographical content is unsourced, and many of the given sources don't cover Saberi in any detail. Some, like blogs, are not reliable. You should instead rely on sources such as the Zeit article - a newspaper article that covers Saberi in some detail. Also, it reads like a promotional pamphlet with lots of nice-sounding statements that ultimately impart no information. For example, "Saberi has a focus on reinterpretation of common materials which is visible in his work." - how does he reinterpret common materials? What common materials exactly? Which parts of his work show this reinterpretation? What's the source? Or "he explores unique ways to protect the body through clothing" - says who? What exactly are those unique ways? Furthermore, I'd remove the majority of the collections and exhibitions and only keep those discussed by reliable third-party sources in some detail. Huon (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kliegl Bros. Universal Electric Stage Lighting Co., Inc.
[edit]I edited the article, adding new references, saved the page and resubmitted. My edits do not appear in the re-submission. I am not sure what to do.Dwsafford (talk) 17:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- You used <\ref> instead of </ref>. Thus your footnotes were never properly closed, and the content afterwards was interpreted as part of those footnotes. I fixed that. The draft still relies too much on unreliable sources such as unpublished manuscripts or websites without editorial oversight such as findagrave.com, though. Huon (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I've been working on this article for some time. I'm looking for suggestions on what I can add or change about this article to make it more unbiased and read less like an advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brittany.keegan (talk • contribs) 20:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- You can start with the very first sentence: We don't really care what they're "dedicated to", we care what they are and what they do. Also, many of your sources are too closely connected to the organization itself, with the third-party sources only mentioning the organization in passing. Many sections don't cite any sources at all, or only the organization's own website. Huon (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm sorry, while I've done some article editing, this is my first original article. I'm a little confused as, at the top, it says "Article not currently submitted for review," while at the bottom, it says, "Review waiting." I'm assuming that means I have properly submitted the article for review. If I am mistaken in this, please let me know.
My main question concerns an image associated with the article. The article is for a new album from the band Silver Sun. I copied its format from articles on other albums of theirs, and there is a place for a cover image. I included the file name for that image in the article, but, of course, no such file exists on Wikipedia as of yet. I tried to upload it yesterday, but I was unconfirmed at that point, as I had not made enough edits. I remedied that today by adding a live album to the Silver Sun article's discography. I can now upload images. However, since the article does not exist, I am unable to upload the image. It seems to be a catch 22. If the article is approved as is, it will have a spot where the album cover is supposed to appear with just a file name in it. Can you offer me any advice as to what I should do?
Many thanks!
Kishinthunder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishinthunder (talk • contribs) 21:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Since the album cover is not a free image it must be used in an article proper. Once the article is accepted and moved to mainspace, either you or someone else can upload it. ~Charmlet -talk- 22:54, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi My Wiki for my fictional rock band was decline on the grounds of notability, I can understand this being an issue if the band were real but not sure why it matters for a made up bio for a made up band.
Spiderman, superman, batman etc. are listed as fictional can the same principles be applied to my fictional band?
Many thanks,
Col — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock-hill2013 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- @Rock-hill2013: Spiderman, Superman, and Batman all are notable. It does not matter what a subject is, or whether it is real or fake, but all subjects must be notable. ~Charmlet -talk- 22:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)