Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 February 18
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < February 17 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 19 > |
| 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. |
February 18
[edit]07:23:06, 18 February 2016 review of submission by 41.242.136.10
[edit]I'm wondering why my article has been declined? what is it i'm not doing right? This is a church document i want to be with wikipedia. kindly assist me to publish the information.
Waiting for prompt response. Kindest regards 41.242.136.10 (talk) 07:23, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- @PEkwam: Wikipedia only publishes articles on topics that have received significant attention from the world at large. For example Old Church of St Nidan, Llanidan has been written about in books and scholarly journals. Most churches are of only local interest, and have only been written about by people connected to the church, such as on the church website, and are thus unsuitable for an article in Wikipedia.
- Instead of Wikipedia, I recommend that you write about the church on a social networking site such as Facebook or Google+, or in an alternative outlet. Worldbruce (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I submitted an article for review about Bed-Knob and Broomstick the book published by Mary Norton. The reviewer felt I had violated the copyright of another online author. However, since I provide the reference source as an end-note and I do not need to state in the text that I was paraphrasing, I feel the reviewer was overly harsh in reviewing and deleting my work. I respectfully request that someone else please evaluate the situation. If it is still a problem, then at least allow me the opportunity to correct the problem, instead of deleting it straight away. Thank you.
Caetreli (talk) 07:42, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- FYI, the now deleted draft was at Draft:Bed-Knob and Broomstick. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
15:37:44, 18 February 2016 review of submission by Operating words
[edit]- Operating words (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
Operating words (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I would like to suggest a page about an artis and researcher. I have read the policy of not making posts unless there is a notable significance specially if one suggest an article about once self. So i would lke o suggest a page with some links and request to be reviewed by another editor. could i do that here? Operating words (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Operating words: I'm not sure that I understand your question, but if you would like to ask a volunteer to write an article about a person, the place to request that is Wikipedia:Requested articles. Be sure to add your request in the correct section, and list some independent, reliable sources of information about the person. Worldbruce (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
17:10:43, 18 February 2016 review of submission by Bnriverkeeper
[edit]I am trying to get this page published. I just created it and took the information from the Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper website. At the bottom of the page I have the website reference but I keep getting denied for not adequately showing the subject's notability. There is a reference to the site on the page. Bnriverkeeper (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Presumably you haven't read the feedback at the top of your draft or on your user talk page. There are many useful links in those feedback boxes, but the important part which answers your question is " Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". --David Biddulph (talk) 17:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- LG Brichetto (talk · contribs)
Hello. I have resubmitted an article for creation review after adding more sources. I would welcome collaboration with other editors to improve this article. The article was resubmitted about 1 week ago. Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Parables_TVLG Brichetto (talk)
LG Brichetto (talk) 19:46, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
20:23:43, 18 February 2016 review of submission by Devongallant
[edit]- Devongallant (talk · contribs)
Hello, my article was rejected based on guidelines of notability. I had used IMDB citations at first, not realizing that that website was not allowed as a citation, so I have removed those links as well as any links to personal websites and tried to expand on the news media coverage. Unfortunately, there is only limited coverage of this art school in the media however, as it is now an accredited College level educational institution, I believe that it is deserving of its own article as an organization and is relevant to wiki's "Higher Education in Quebec," article. Any help in trouble shooting this article is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Devongallant (talk) 20:23, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
After already doing a detailed revision I get the following Message from R. McClenon: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." I guess I'm expected to read/study multiple wikipedia explanation pages to try to figure out exactly what's wrong!?
I just don't understand exactly what this R.M. person wants? I'm not trying to trick anyone here. I'm just trying to post a legitimate profile of someone. In fact, as far as I can tell, what I've done so far is already better than many such profiles I have seen on wikipedia. That said, can someone tell me specifically what I need to do to get it right? I need an example(s) as to what I have to do to get this article accepted? Please, tell me exactly what I have to do to get my "Champian Fulton" profile accepted; specifically please?
There's no point in engaging in an endless "guessing game" cycle. Tell me specifically what I need to do and I'll fix it.
Thanks very much.
Sfawcett (talk) 23:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Sfawcett: Being an effective contributor to Wikipedia is nine parts reading to one part writing. The draft shows that you know how to cite a source using footnotes (the format is unusual, but should be acceptable), so the most important link you've been pointed to is minimum standard for inline citations. Biographies of living persons (BLPs) have the most stringent requirements for inline citations of any type of article.
- The lede is a summary of the rest of the article. The facts it summarizes should already have inline citations in the body of the article, so inline citations in the lede would be redundant. For readability reasons, inline citations are discouraged in the lede (if you study featured BLPs you'll see that about 60% have none). The fact that the reviewer has criticized the lede for not having any inline citations suggests that they don't feel the lede accurately summarizes the article, or they were unable to find corresponding inline citations in the body, or they believe some statement in the lede is implausible enough to require a second inline citation. You would have to ask them for clarification.
- How many inline citations to use in the body is a judgement call. The reviewer pointed out that the entire biography section contains no inline citations. Is there really nothing in that section likely to be challenged? Don't you think someone reading "started playing piano and trumpet at age three" and "a world renowned trumpeter" is likely to react with "Oh yeah, prove it!"? On this particular draft, one citation per sentence would be overdoing it, but you're likely to encounter push back from reviewers without at least one citation per paragraph.
- Another way to look at it is that if each source is cited exactly once, the author is probably doing something wrong. A good source, well used, will support content in several different places in a well-written article. See Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once for the best way to cite a source multiple times. Worldbruce (talk) 17:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
23:51:59, 18 February 2016 review of submission by Joewriter
[edit]
I am confused by the response from the editor who rejected the entry, who says the entry lacks sufficient documentation; however, there are a dozen end notes, citing articles in the New York Times, the St. Louis Post Dispatch, Readers Digest, Contemporary Authors, and other sources. The subject of the entry is the author of a baseball novel that was a finalist for a prize, was cited by the editors of a major metropolitan newspaper as one of the best works of fiction for the year of its publication. It also received a good number of other strong reviews from other newspapers and magazines, which I did not cite, since I thought the point of the entry was to be representative and not encyclopedic. The book has received mention in a number of articles citing the best baseball novels of all time; perhaps the entry might mention those? I am not sure what else to do with this but would like some guidance.