Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 May 2
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < May 1 | << Apr | May | Jun >> | Current help desk > |
| 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. |
May 2
[edit]
Thank you for reformatting the list w/links and adding the 2 new External links in response to the request I made on April 30th. Can you also pass along to the reviewer the paragraph I wrote explaining why the list should be included? Also, in the resubmission I changed these links: Susan Dayton http://www.indeed.com/r/Susan-Dayton/04e349d12c10b620
Denise Kamradt http://www.classicalarchives.com/artist/42898.html
Oded (Udi) Pintus http://www.amazon.com/Avni-Psalms-Strings-Gilboa-Mediterranean/dp/B007T6C6PA
Phyllis Secrist http://www.music.utk.edu/faculty/secrist.html
Could you correct those in the Draft?
Also please address the error showing Bloom's birth and death dates as inaccurate. They are accurate as written and the years are not invalid. He was not 106 in the year he was born nor was he 895 in the year he died.
Thank you. SLBloom (talk) 05:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- @SLBloom: You're welcome. Now that you've been shown a formatted example, I'm confident you're capable of changing the draft yourself. If you read the documentation for Template:Infobox musical artist you'll see that your error with respect to the dates is choosing the date template for living people instead of the one for dead people. The draft needs to stand on its own, it can't depend for survival on anything passed along separately. It's up to you to figure out how to work into the text a clear statement of why the subject is notable and why the information in the article is important. Worldbruce (talk) 06:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
16:22:17, 2 May 2015 review of submission by Julia Boyd
[edit]- Julia Boyd (talk · contribs)
Regarding the article David Wallace (executive), I believe the title should read David Wallace (market research). That is what he did and describes his achievements. He was a purist and stood by his research.
Julia Boyd (talk) 16:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Julia Boyd: The David Wallace (executive) article is no longer an Article for Creation, having been accepted into the mainspace, so the place to discuss that name change would be either on the article's talk page or through a requested move. However, it seems to me that the title is fine as is. Per WP:QUALIFIER, words added to a title for disambiguation purposes are usually a noun indicating what the person is noted for being in his or her own right. In most cases these nouns are standard, commonly used tags such as "(musician)" and "(politician)". WP:QUALIFIER also suggests limit[ing] the tag to a single, recognizable and highly applicable term. Since the vast majority of disambiguaters in titles are nouns describing the subject's profession, I think David Wallace's profession—"executive"—disambiguates the article better than "market research". wia (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)