Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 January 21
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < January 20 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 22 > |
| 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. |
January 21
[edit]07:27:44, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Vivekgupta23
[edit]- Vivekgupta23 (talk · contribs)
I just want to know how much time it takes for review of a draft. Kindly review my draft.
Vivekgupta23 (talk) 07:27, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Vivekgupta23: Reviews can take up to 4-6 weeks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
16:14:04, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Paulbuta
[edit]When we first submitted last summer, we were rejected because the tone was too promotional. We removed much of the promotional content, and then we were rejected because of a lack of notability. I'm confused about how best to address this rejection. The article already mentions that we were recommended by the National Science Teachers Association, an independent organization that is well-recognized by science teachers. We have many more reviews from independent third parties. For example, Balefire Labs just selected JogNog as one of the best educational apps of 2014 for English, Science, Math and Social Studies (http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/01/prweb12441668.htm). Many other review sites and education-specific periodicals make similar recommendations. But, it seems like adding a long list of independent 3rd party reviews would start to run afoul of limits on being promotional. Would piling on more reviews do the trick? Or would first-person testimonials from teachers be better? Or, do we need something else like a front-page story in the New York Times about a curriculum controversy (which most teachers don't have time to read)? Thanks! Paulbuta (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
18:10:59, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Katedessommes
[edit]Can I upload photos from Willamet week and yoga journal as public domain if they are published in articles? thanks, k
Katedessommes (talk) 18:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Katedessommes: This question should probably go at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, as the answer isn't strightforward. Was the image in the public domain before it was used by Willamet Week and Yoga Journal? Did you take the pictures (or is the photographer/copyright holder willing to release it into the public domain)? Did you (or the photographer) sign any sort of contract that assigned rights to the photos to Willamet Week and Yoga Journal? --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
19:47:33, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Jackieb132
[edit]- Jackieb132 (talk · contribs)
I am new to Wikipedia and have already written an article in my sandbox and it was accepted, but I need to start a new article but not sure how to clear my sandbox of the older article! Thank you!!
Jackieb132 (talk) 19:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Jackie, when an article is Moved, it creates a WP:Redirect. That's why when you go to (User:Jackieb132/sandbox it bounces you to your article. If you get bounced, look right below the title of the page, and it'll say "Sent here from: User:Jackieb132/sandbox". Click that link and it'll take you to your original page, and you can start editing there.
- You also can create as many "sandboxes" as you want under different titles. For example, if you type User:Jackieb132/History of Acme Typewriters and create an article at that link, that also functions as a "sandbox" for you, so it doesn't have to say "sandbox" to be one, just anything that's a branch off from your account's name can serve as sandbox. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
20:14:06, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Brentferraro
[edit]- Brentferraro (talk · contribs)
- Brentferraro (talk · contribs)
I am wondering why the article I created, John A. OConnor, was not accepted. I had originally submitted images with the article, which were declined, but the article itself did not include any copyrighted information.
I would like to get information on what I can do to get the article published.
Brentferraro (talk) 20:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- Brentferraro, when I copy-paste random snippets from your draft into Google, I'm finding multiple websites that use that exact same wording. So you can see why we're referring to this as a copyright violation. Unless a website explicitly says that it is public domain or released under WP:Creative Commons, it is assumed to be copyrighted. You cannot simply copy-paste from other websites.
- Your draft also gives a bunch of resume-style gobbledygook we don't need right up front. The key thing is to explain how significant he is, clearly cited to art world commentators, columnists, academics etc who have written about Connor and his work. Not a dry list of "1988-1989 served as Sub-Director of Such-and-Such" as that makes for very dull reading.
- I strongly advise you read WP:Notability (artists) which explains what such an article must include and focus on. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
23:03:49, 21 January 2015 review of submission by Clementoria
[edit]- Clementoria (talk · contribs)
This page is about a living writer, yet there is not much critical work--reviews, articles, etc.--on him. I have referenced all the articles that have been written, but many contemporary writers are not written about by academics and yet are very important. So, a general question is what to do about that, and a more specific question is where in this article are citations deemed needed. Thanks so much for any help. Clementoria (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC) Clementoria (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Clementoria: Wikipedia is considered a "lagging indicator" of notability -- that is, we write about things here only after other people have written about them. If this living writer doesn't yet have much significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article then it is too soon to have an article on this person. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)