Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 June 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 24 << May | June | Jul >> June 26 >
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.


June 25

[edit]

00:17:42, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Lpwords

[edit]


I am not sure why the sources I've quoted are not considered notable. Several are newspaper articles and three are published books. I can delete the references to ListenUp's materials, but I noted that Apple, Inc., cites their materials so thought a couple would be okay. Thanks.Lpwords (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lpwords (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

02:47:07, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Muralipg

[edit]

Muralipg (talk) 02:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Muralipg: no Declined You're welcome. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

09:05:31, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Randomsson

[edit]

Hi! I submitted a new page but i'm not sure if i did something wrong as i have a feeling it's not being reviewed :S (did not receive any confirmation or whatsoever. Can anyone confirm please ?

Thanks :)

Randomsson (talk) 09:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Randomsson: I have added the template to allow you to submit it. For some reason it was absent. Please visit the draft, consider if you are happy that it is ready, and submit. Fiddle Faddle 09:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:02, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Sibadd

[edit]


Simon Baddeley (talk) 09:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have been able to obtain references to the work of this subject and have added them to the draft article. I have also uploaded a commons image that I submit for inclusion https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pressing_the_farmer%27s_olive_oil.JPG Simon Baddeley (talk) 09:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC) Simon Baddeley (talk) 09:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Sibadd: I looked for your sources. The book you're calling Culture and Heritage Combined is in Greek and called Politistika kai mouseiologika symmeikta. I wasn't able to find Anthology of Literature and Art and I suspect you've translated that title, too. Wikipedia allows for non-English sources but I can't accept what I can't verify. I also noticed that your subject doesn't have an article in Greek Wikipedia yet. () If Greek Wikipedia had an AfC project I might be more willing to accept a translated version here. As it is, I don't read Greek so I'm not willing to assume good faith on sources. I haven't declined your submission because Aristedes Metallinos might be notable and I'd be willing to wait for an editor that can read those sources to decide. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10:58:03, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Displaydude

[edit]


I have not used any copy righted material for the article. Can any article be summarily dismissed giving this reason? Will reviewer justify by showing what copy righted sources have been used ?

Displaydude (talk) 10:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is copied from a Wordpress blog. The problem is that any content you put on Wikipedia can be reused and resold by anyone, which by default a Wordpress site does not provide. So even if you wrote the original blog, if you copy and paste the contents here, it will be text with a licence incompatible with Wikipedia's. The simplest thing to do is to rewrite the text again. However, your draft has a further issue in that is reads like a how-to guide, and doesn't seem to indicate something that would belong in an encyclopedia, unfortunately. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:32, 25 June 2014 review of submission by Naturalreadhead

[edit]

I got the article restored after letting it languish before making the initially requested edits to raise it to the necessary level of notability. I've done some extensive edits on this page over the past two days and have been saving them but am not sure about the process to get it re-reviewed. I'm hoping this submission is the path to having that happen. There are more details to add; however, I would like it reviewed again to see if I'm on the right track. I'm leading an Edit-a-Thon at a conference this weekend and would like to be able to point to my own page as an example. Naturalreadhead (talk) 15:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission was not marked for review. I have had a look through the sources, which include the Star Tribune and the New York Times and conclude that Carson Kreitzer has sufficient coverage in reliable and independent sources to have an article, so I will pass it now. By "would like to be able to point to my own page" - do you simply mean you would like to show this article as an example of your work, or do you mean you are Carson Kreitzer? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By that phrasing I mean that I created the article. I am NOT Carson Kreitzer. I know that it's gotten a "start" rating which means its sources need to be beefed up. But I've found articles on other writers that do not have nearly as many sources as I have included. I want to make sure I've got a strong handle on "strong sources" within the context of Wikipedia because I'm also trying to balance neutral point of view and verifiability. Since this is a living person, the writing about her is very presentist which means newspapers versus journal articles. Do you have suggestions on better approaches than what I am including/doing currently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalreadhead (talk • contribs) 16:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Naturalreadhead: Your sources aren't really the issue, it's more a question of presentation. Wikipedia:The perfect article contains some concise advice, but to give you some ideas :
  • As the tag (automatically put in by the AfC reviewing script) states at the top of the article, your references use bare URLs, which creates a problem if the site disappears or changes. By adding more context such as publisher, title, date and original access date, we can use a tool such as the Wayback machine to find an archived copy later. You can click on the "Reflinks tool" to do a lot of this.
  • The quotation at the end of the first paragraph is unsourced. All quotations must have an inline citation
  • There are certain words and phrases to watch, such as "award-winning". Instead, just say what awards she has won (each with an inline citation to a reliable source that states it)
  • The article has a number of in-line links (as seen on the second paragraph). These should be avoided.
  • The section "full-length" plays would probably benefit from being prose, instead of a list. I would ultimately expect the article to have a lead section summarising Kreitzer's life and career in a few paragraphs, then a more substantial body covering early life and qualifications, her work in chronological order, and then any critical praise and views of her writing style.
If you're going to an edit-a-thon, hopefully there'll be somebody there who can help you. Or have a look at some of the language and literature good articles to see examples of some quality work on this subject that should be within easy reach once you're familiar with Wikipedia's house style and policies.
Having said all of that, doing the sources first is a good idea, as it means the article will be kept. If you've found other articles on playwrights or authors with few to no sources, then all that really means those articles are more at risk of being nominated for deletion than this one. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:24:47, 25 June 2014 review of submission by 208.48.150.124

[edit]


I'm Robin Shelby, and noticed someone made the attempt to get a Wikipedia page created. I noticed it needed more notable credentials to be accepted. I can provide the following outside links providing a little more info on my background:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Vintage-Puppet-Tests-Of-Slimer-From-Ghostbusters-2-25012.html http://www.imdb.com/news/ni11312641/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters_(franchise)


208.48.150.124 (talk) 16:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since the article is in the protected environment of the Articles For Creation project, conflict of interest is treated with less jaundiced eyes than if it were an article already accepted. Please feel at liberty to add those items yourself. IMDB, though, is not a reliable source, and Wikipedia may not be used as a reference, so that element needs to be Wikilinked. For a living person we have a higher standard of referencing. Every fact you assert requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS. Fiddle Faddle 09:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

22:10:59, 25 June 2014 request for review by Aubree S

[edit]

Can you please clarify or give suggestions on what type of verifiable sources can a small business use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aubree S (talk • contribs) 22:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Aubree S: I noticed that LukeSurl provided some clear, extended comments for your submission, so I'm not sure what part isn't clear to you. Please read WP:NCORP, WP:RS, and WP:42. But to oversimplify, Viewpath has to be discussed in newspapers, magazines, and books that aren't advertisements and are independent of the company and its corporate partners. The Integrations and Pricing sections are inappropriate, at best. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_June_25&oldid=1119086007"