Help desk
< September 22	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 24 >

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 23

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KIRIKIRI TOWN

gretings sir, i am only a learner, i wish to ;earn editing and article creation some day. my article was declined please can you tell me why?. Although i knew it wasn't up to the standard. thank you.--^^^^ 00:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedricx (talk • contribs)

Your submission will be reviewed at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kirikiri. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:59, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Free government education

why my article is declined — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katherasala.srinivas (talk • contribs) 03:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As was stated when the submission was declined, it seemed to be an essay of your own opinions, rather than facts cited to reliable sources. We also already have an article on Free education. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/AZair

Dear Madam/Sir, my submission has been declined due to "Reference should be from valid independent sources". The sources I cited are national newspapers (in Czech Republic) - how come they are not considered valid and independent ? What other resources should I use in this particular case ? The subject is rather new, it is about a search engine, so it is not like it was cited in Encyclopedia Britannica... Thank you very much for any guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by O.dvorak (talk • contribs) 08:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The user who declined your submission, WikiJuggernaut (talk · contribs) has only been editing since 14 August, which (imho) is not really enough time to be sufficiently experienced to review submissions. National Czech newspapers are absolutely fine as sources, provided they support the information present, and do not violate other policies such as dealing with living people (for this reason you should avoid citing the broad equivalent to The Sun or the Daily Mail). The main concern I have though, is that there doesn't appear to be much coverage about the website - for something to be truly notable I would probably expect sustained national coverage throughout the past year. Two brief news pieces probably aren't sufficient, I'm afraid. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Access Control Technology Ltd.

Hi! Any update on this page? Mgavenda Mgavenda (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is currently waiting for review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Fried

Greetings, while rewriting my article today, I noticed something was different when saved: The changes only appear when i am logged in. This was not how it was working before. When Logged out, the changes only become visible when I hit the edit tab. I have cleared cache and quit browser, but the changes do not appear without logging in again.

As this article is waiting on review, I am hopeful that my recent changes will be visible to any reviewer, and not just to myself when logged in. Is this a problem that i should be concerned about? Thanks! Hindsite (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what is causing the effects you describe.

However, looking at the page, I can see more than a dozen edits made by you today 23rd September between 09:44 GMT and 15:27 GMT - these changes - and these are all visible in the page so any reviewer will be able to see them. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Thank you very much! Problem with visibility must be on my side.Hindsite (talk) 16:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question about using quotes from published books on the article's subject: (Section- Works 2000-2013) While mostly explanatory, these referenced quotes are from original book texts about the artist's artworks, and are therefore not written in an encyclopedic style. I have researched many other artists articles and find the inclusion of such texts. Is this a permissible form for Wiki articles of living artists? Thanks & any suggestions appreciated!Hindsite (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean published material by the article's subject? So for example I see in your draft the text "One immediately gets a sense of motion as we look to connect the dots, perhaps in search of some nonsensical sense, while noticing that as we project our own synaptic perspective into the network", which is neither quoted nor directly cited. (Thus it's not at all clear where this text or this concept comes from.) There are at least two problems with such text. First, it's not in an encyclopedic tone. Second, if it's taken from somewhere else, it's almost certainly a copyright violation. Even if one were to quote and directly cite such material, it would likely not be acceptable; see the third example in Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing#Quotation of non-free text. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Incidentally, Wikipedia has relatively few Good Articles about living artists, but Harvey Littleton, Jean-Claude Mézières, and Peggy Rockman Napaljarri are all examples of such. These might be better to use as examples than just any Wikipedia article that happens to be a living artist. You might find a few more at Wikipedia:Good articles/Art and architecture under artists. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will eagerly look into your suggested articles! Yes, that is indeed one of the more non-explanatory passages that i was worried about. I can remove it and similar. 3 of the 5 texts are from books with isbn numbers, and are posted on the artist webpage, and can be found on many other websites. So far the other 2 are only referenced to the artist's official website. I placed the most accessible references at the end of each entire text- is that not correct? About copyright, though widely copied and paraphrased online and in newspapers, magazines and online, I can ask for written permission from the authors if needs be - but if you believe the chances of another rejection based on issues with these texts is probable, would you recommend that they simply be removed altogether for now? Hindsite (talk) 12:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Idol Image Media Group

Just trying to make sure I included the proper information needed for creation of article. I resent the citations which I believe was the issue. I do apologize I am new at creating articles. Corysmith1 (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you included are largely not the reliable independent sources Wikipedia content should be based on. The only one that arguably is reliable is the State business filing, and that's not significant coverage. Those sources don't establish that the company is notable enough for an artilce. You may also want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing about your own company is discouraged. Huon (talk) 02:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Institutes of Health Federal Credit Union

The automated bot flagged a potential copyright violation but this is from the official nihfcu.org website, which you can also find at https://www.nihfcu.org/about-nihfcu/who-we-are.aspx.

Tpmd (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2013 (UTC)Tpmd[reply]

You may not copy from another source. You must write fully in your own words. See WP:YFA for help writing your first article. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 22:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Julio Gonzalez

The main problem about this article is that there is no news source or article of Julio Gonzalez existing on the internet. His existence could only be proven by three things: his father's wikipedia page, his social websites, and his father's Facebook. Thus, giving a link would be near impossible as a citation for source outside of social media. Is there something that could possibly prove said facts by another method?

JWingWangWong (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Offline sources are also acceptable, see WP:IRS for more information. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 22:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only certain sources are acceptable. Newspapers and magazines that have a wide circulation can be used, as can books published by a significant publisher. It really depends on what sources you're planning to use. However, having read your article, I have to say I'd be surprised if significant sources exist based on what you've written. You might well find what you've got is actually news pieces about Julio César González that mention his son in trivial passing mentions, which is not significant coverage. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:00, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/College Press Box - TSTV

why did my article get denied? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoffmanharryut (talk • contribs) 22:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You were given the exact reasons why it was declined, as well as how to fix it, on the draft page. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 22:48, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]