Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 April 8
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < April 7 | << Mar | April | May >> | April 9 > |
| 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 8
[edit]08:32:50, 8 April 2016 review of submission by 114.121.135.206
[edit]- 114.121.135.206 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
114.121.135.206 (talk) 08:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @114.121.135.206:, what is your question and what draft are you asking about (please post a link to it)? MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
11:35:46, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Penlite
[edit]
I tried entering my brief autobiographical article on my user page, but got this official message, in a pink box: "If you want to draft an article, please create a userspace draft instead of creating it here." So (as near as I can remember) I clicked on the wikilinked words "userspace draft," inserted my text, and when finished, submitted it for review per the instructions on the screen. I was not trying to violate wiki protocol, I was trying to obey it.
Yet, today, when I logged back in, I was confronted with a notice that my attempt to create the page and submit it for review was rejected, with the chastisement that (in so many words) I should have just uploaded it without submitting it for review! My sandbox was empty, and the User:Penlite page was basically blank. No trace of my extensive work.
Somebody needs to clean up the confusing nomenclature and instructions about "userspace" "main page" etc., and the various flags and warnings and instructions that apparently are appearing in inappropriate times and places. If you do not want people to do something, don't tell them to do it. Please.
Penlite (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's the automatically formatted message I got, in a tan box:
- Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:
Inside of the TAN box was GRAY box (presumably the only personal element of the message), that said:
- This is obviously not an actual article, this belongs on your main user page. Please do not submit it for review, AFC deals only with articles, not users'"about me" information.
Then the rest of the tan box said:
- Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Talk about conflicting instructions ! Wikipedia needs a better way to communicate about these topics.
14:14:26, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Jessicaeise
[edit]- Jessicaeise (talk · contribs)
I am requesting a re-review in order to get specific feedback for my article. I have received two rejections so far but neither reviewer gave me specifics of what I need to change. I was hoping by reaching out to the help desk that you may be able to give me specific ways in which I can improve my article.
- Hi Jessicaeise Short answer - all your referenced sources are published by Purdue University or its affiliated structures, thus the topic is not (yet) proven to be notable. Longer answer - You need to cite multiple independent sources that contain in-depth information about the topic. "Independent" in this context means mainstream newspapers, magazines, books and other reputable publications, that have no connection at all to Purdue University. Wikipedia does not care much for what a subject (or it's friends and associates) have to say about itself - we are only really interested in what outsiders have to say. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Roger Roger (Dodger67),
I want to thank you so much for you speedy feedback. I was wondering, would it be appropriate to use some sources that are associated with my topic or should they all be independent of my topic, with no direct affiliation whatsoever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaeise (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Jessicaeise. Wikipedia favors large, comprehensive articles. Information about a particular department within a university almost always belongs in the main university article, not in a stand alone article. Individual departments rarely satisfy the notability criteria. For more information, see the section on faculties, academic colleges, and departments in the essay "Wikipedia:College and university article advice". Also consider WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, which notes that except for law schools and medical schools, parts of universities are not inherently notable.
- There is an entire WikiProject Universities dedicated to articles about universities. Their article guidelines, referenced above, may help you see how to incorporate some of what you've written into Purdue University. You can also ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities or Talk:Purdue University. If you're determined to go the separate article route, I wish you luck, but fear you will be disappointed. To answer your specific question, independent sources must be the basis for the bulk of any article. Non-independent sources may be used for a lesser portion. It's best to use them only for essential but non-controvertial details that you can't source any other way. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
16:23:28, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Vawab
[edit]
It was suggested that my Article "Waban Library Center" needs improvement....Can I have some suggestions ? Thanks
Vawab (talk) 16:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Done Hello @Vawab:, this helpdesk is for article still in Draft stage, and fortunately your draft has been approved and published, so outside of our jurisdiction. That said, if you drop into WT:WikiProject Architecture you might find someone to offer advice. As a non-building expert, my main suggestion would be to google up a few news articles (ideally not just local-interest ones, though one or two of those would be fine) that point out unique and interesting things about this building/institution, then you can add those facts and cite them to the sources. I see Boston Globe has mentioned the building a few times, so maybe check those, and whatever else jumps out at you that's from any reputable news source, academic paper, etc.
- If you yourself live in the area, a photo(s) of the building would be a strong addition, and maybe there are some other sites of interest in the town that lack photos, so you can help Wikipedia and have fun by doing a little expedition to snap those shots and upload them so the world can see more Waban.
- Nice work on your now-published article, hope you'll stick around to do more, and/or figure out existing articles about your area that need photos added! MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I have been denied three times by the editors and I am unsure why. Many people on here has far less notability and have been accepted. I am unsure why my creation has not. I need help editing this article for a approve submission.