Help desk
< April 18	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 20 >

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.

April 19

Ready Draft:Bocage_Plantation

I (and others) have updated Draft:Bocage_Plantation, with many footnotes, to be ready for release (from 15 March 2014), but page wp:AfC did not explain how I release a draft page. Can I simply move that page into main (article) namespace, or it there some other process I should read? -Wikid77 (talk) 00:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted @Wikid77: Don't forget you can submit an entry to the Did You Know WikiProject within 5 days. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Perth Redcastle Brewery

How to insert picture of Perth Redcastle Brewery building c.1927. and/ or pictures of beer bottle labels . Warwick 1939 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warwick1939 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That depends. Who took the photo of the building? Who owns the copyright to the beer bottle labels? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shiroikabe

--Shitoikabe (talk) 07:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vitaphone Varieties

Submitting Vitaphone Varieties under "Articles for creation" since it is a rather lengthy post, with lengthy lists that I do not wish to be an "eye sore" to a reader. (I have debated whether or not to make a chart listing.) It would be nice if somebody could check it and make suggestions. Jlewis68 20:09, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The article should begin with the following, but I am not certain if my comments on the "Talk" page accidentally altered it:

"Vitaphone Varieties was a series title (represented by a pennant logo on screen) for all of Warner Brothers earliest short film “talkies” of the 1920s, initially done with the Vitaphone disc process before a switch to the sound-on-film process by the end of the decade. These were the first major film studio-backed sound films, initially showcased with the 1926 synchronized scored features Don Juan and The Better 'Ole. Although independent producers like Lee de Forest’s Phonofilm were successfully making sound film shorts as far back as 1922, they were more limited in their distribution and their audio was generally not as loud in theaters as the Vitaphone system. The success of these early films, initially filmed in New York, helped launch the sound revolution in Hollywood."

Jlewis68 19:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlewis68 (talk • contribs)

Declined @Jlewis68: Your proposed lede paragraph is all you've presented and it's unreferenced. If you wanted to submit a list article, that can be done but you'd need to put it together. Also, you've not yet established notability. Perhaps you could instead begin adding content to Vitaphone before you spin-off content into an independent article? Chris Troutman (talk) 04:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately my prediction was correct. The impression I have is that only the first paragraph of a much longer article got seen. The rest, including all of the references, was lost. My guess is that it got deleted with my talk page comments. Will try to submit the complete article with references later... OR... perhaps I will take your advice and somehow incorporate it into the other article. Jlewis68 11:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlewis68 (talk • contribs)

I went ahead and resubmitted the ENTIRE article so that somebody can read it in full. Again, I suspect a huge chunk of it was missing due to a technical problem. Jlewis68 14:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlewis68 (talk • contribs)

@Jlewis68: Thanks for adding the other content, I can see where you're going with this. I think your submission can be accepted, since you have multiple publications in the references. I'm hesitant because this AfC process is designed to give articles better than a 50/50 chance of surviving a nomination for deletion. To stave off a later deletion threat, I'd like to see (while it is not required) this submission get cleaned up with a sortable table and in-line citations. Ugly articles sometimes draw editor ire, regardless of content. If you need help making these changes, please ask. I'll try to get you started so this can be accepted sooner than later. Again, I think this meets criteria but I'm less confident this could survive a vote. Chris Troutman (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will do my best... and, yes, it will take me time to reformat the entire thing. Allow me to RE-submit it before further critiquing. (A few articles submitted before have a similar format, but because they were shorter, readers who might have been "bothered" simply added changes of their own to them. None have been deleted... yet.) This one is more of a "problem child" since it may be better suited to a movie reference site than wikipedia. Jlewis68 12:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC) (signing this comment three more times to make sure the "bot" people stop giving me warnings about "not signing" when I always try-try-try signing my comments despite technical glitches.)Jlewis68 12:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC) / Jlewis68 12:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC) / Jlewis68 12:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlewis68 (talk • contribs) Jlewis68 12:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlewis68 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nature Parks and Galleries

Hi,

My article Nature Parks and Galleries has been declined for publication, since it had insufficient contents to be accounted as an independent one. What kind of contents are recommended to help expanding it?

I'd like to mention my COI with this article My profile

Thanks! Mikicook 20:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikicook: Thank you for announcing your COI; it's much more helpful to deal with honesty than the hijinks we deal with so many other editors.

I'm not convinced that an open-air museum at a university qualifies for its own article. Is there a reason you're not adding this content to the university article? Furthermore, your submission does read in a promotional tone. Phrases like "The 8-acre forest in the heart of campus looks disorderly compared to the neatly planned campus gardens. But, as the signage soon to be installed along this 300 meter boardwalk explains, forests have their own order." sounds like it was taken from a brochure. Why, for instance, are you listing the publications produced by the museum about the museum holdings?

Please chop this down to a quarter of its current size and add it to the university article. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris troutman,

Thanks for your reply. I havn't listed it in the University's page, first of all since I thought that rather than making changes to exsiting pages myself, as a user with COI, I should just recommend it to be done on the talk page (which I did - HUJI's talk page). Secondly, I wanted to get clear first if it'd get an article of its own or not.

I do not wish to be pushy about that, I'll try to explain - The comments I got so far weren't about being biased, but about contents, phrasing and so on; I've seen other open air museums in Israel did get their own articles (Here); It has trice the contents than the University's Campus in which the museum is operating. These are the reasons why I thaught it apropriate for the museum to have a page of its own. I agree the phrasing is promotional. Anyhow, bottom line, should it be under the University's page? If so, would you advise for me to do it myslef? If not, I'd love for some more feedback about it (I'll correct the phrasing for sure and I havn't understood what did you mean by "publications produced by the museum about the museum holdings")

Thanks Mikicook 07:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding photos to body of text

Hello there,

I am improving my article and thank you for your feedback.

Today, I uploaded a file (head & shoulder of Philip John Beauchamp) and then I went into my 'edit text' with the intension of adding the photo. When I selected "picture gallery" I only the HTML tags were added within the body of my text. Could it be that I can add photos once the article is accepted? In any case, if you could give me a hand with this, I'd be grateful.

Thank you, Kay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susannn001 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]