Help desk
< September 5	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 7 >

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 6

Howling Wolf Productions page

Hello,

The page I made for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Howling Wolf Productions was not accepted. What steps should I take in order to ensure acceptance in the future? 108.201.158.188 (talk) 00:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to read our policy on verifiability and on what constitutes reliable sources. You also need to establish that this organization/company is notable per Wikipedia's standards. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 00:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

In the 237 years of the united states how many total days / years has it been at war? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.131.167 (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 00:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Car-buggy crashes

I am a former Amish guy, and my father, brother, and I all have been in car-buggy crashes. My brother died in such an accident in 83, and my father paralyzed when I was a teen back in 97. I want to create a page about car-buggy crashes. I asked on here for help Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vehicle-Buggy collisions, but, as you can see, there are some people that call them self editors, but that dont like to help.

Here is an article that recently was posted on Former Amish News - amish-buggy-accident-on-u-s-42-turns-fatal

So can someone help me with this one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdeleted (talk • contribs) 04:13, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only one editor declined your submission here, and they were correct in informing you that you were in the wrong place. Try listing it in Wikipedia:Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Transport instead. I recall Bill Bryson wrote something on the subject many years ago while travelling through Pennsylvania, possibly The Lost Continent: Travels in Small-Town America, but I can't remember offhand. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has purposely been made to be confusing, no wonder no one wants to help with it. And the page you linked to is a lot more confusing then even this page. [[1]] is a generic page about horse and buggies, but it has no information about this problem, other then a breif reference to the Amish and Anibabtists. (Yes my family is Amish).

Btw I got a notice that someone deleted my talk page? Weird. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdeleted (talk • contribs) 06:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hilan Castle

I am baffled as to how you received a BLANK submission?! I spent hours on that! How do I find it again to see if I messed it up and can fix it? Solsticelight (talk) 06:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid all you submitted was a blank article - the source for it is here. Did you press "Show preview" instead of "Save page" and assume your changes are saved? If you're making large changes, I recommend copy and pasting the text into Notepad and working on it there, saving it locally. Do you mean the building pictured? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:26, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Single Hub and Access point for Paediatric Rheumatology in Europe

Dear Sir, Madame,

My article has been rejected several times now. The fist times it was due to a lack of reference. I resolved that problem. Now it has been rejected because it looks to much like an advertisement. I would like to comment on that. SHARE is a very extensive and important project financed by the European Union. As an outsider, I was asked to write an article on this project and update it as regulary as possible once more progress has been made. It is important for people to know about the SHARE project because its impact on current practice of this diseases will be enormous. In addition, many experts in the field will hear about SHARE on congresses. For example, the share consontium will be present on the PRES congres this month in Slovenia. In short, SHARE is a abbreviation that will be used a lot in this field, and I think it is important for interested people to be able to find information on this project and follow the progress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veaboom (talk • contribs) 10:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can wait until the impact has been enourmous. Right now this looks like yet another EU project with claims of grandeur. Also, I don't think your current sources are good enough to establish that it's a notable project. Quite a few don't even mention it, and many of the others don't look independent to me. Huon (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Periodontal Prosthesis

Just wanted to check on the status of the review of Periodontal Prosthesis article. Mvilardi (talk) 12:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)mvilardi[reply]

As was stated on your submission, there is a backlog, and submissions can take up to three weeks. In your case, because you have specified offline sources, we would really need somebody with experience in dentistry to know whether the sources are suitable are not. However, Periodontal Prosthesis already exists as an article, and redirects to Prosthodontics, so you should simply improve the article there. You might find more success asking in Wikipedia:WikiProject Dentistry or consult the advice at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) to integrate your work into the existing article. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kenneth F. Goldstein

Hi,

I'm trying to get some specific feedback on which words, phrases or facts in the article have gotten it marked as being overly promotional, so I can successfully revise it next time.

Also, with regards to notability, I am a little confused--the initial feedback from reviewers "APerson" and "Arthur goes shopping" seemed to acknowledge that the subject met notability requirements, but the most recent feedback from "Hasteur" as well as feedback in a live chat from "Nutmore" called into question whether the subject was notable.

Finally, I am curious as to why other users keep re-formatting my text into one solid block when I intend it to be broken into 3-4 more readable paragraphs. Is there a Wikipedia convention I'm unaware of?

Thanks, Jh122 (talk) 21:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the article reads as if the fact that various publications covered him were the most important facts readers need to know about him. While we need significant coverage in reliable sources to establish that Goldstein is notable enough for an article, we should cite them for what they have to say about Goldstein, not merely for the fact that they exist. And the draft seems to be somewhat lacking in the "facts about Goldstein" department. When was he born? Where was he educated? What did he do before becoming VP at Broderbund? Apparently nobody bothered to cover that in any detail. Also, linking to his publisher's page on his upcoming book is not a good idea.

Regarding the paragraphs, that looks like a script error to me. I'll notify those editors who maintain the script in question. Huon (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]