Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 October 3
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 2 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 4 > |
| 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. |
October 3
[edit]17:17:42, 3 October 2016 review of submission by Warstic
[edit]
I'm really confused by Wikipedia and creating our page. The entire process make zero sense. None of what we wrote is included in the article. Can someone please help?
Warstic (talk) 17:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not exist to provide you with a medium to advertise your company, which is clearly what you are here for. The reviewer has done you a large service by leaving a stub of your article. It would have qualified for speedy deletion as unambiguous advertising, except that they stubbed it for you rather than tagging it for deletion. Do not use the first person plural pronoun "we" to refer to an account. Wikipedia has a policy of "one account, one person". Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Warstic, I left these comments on your user page also:
- The draft for Warstic was not acceptable for wikipedia because it was not neutrally written.
- But the company is very likely notable, based on the references found so far, so I started the draft again
- please read WP:COI, and declare your connection to the company before you edit anymore
- please request a new username, as your current username is not acceptable
- Thanks. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
2017 in baseball
[edit]| Uncivil commentary |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
What No 2017 in baseball article This is stupid The 2017 in baseball article needs to be created right now not later. you are being lazy get this article made and get your lazy butts in gear now. 2600:8803:7A00:19:657C:3396:A35F:8786 (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC) |
Hello! I'm the author of the Coupon Sherpa entry, which was deleted in September 2015. I've recently revised the entry to better meet the notability and guidelines and posted a message on the reviewer's talk page. However, I'm not sure where to go from here -- it appears my message has been archived on the reviewer's talk page, so I'm not sure if he/she received it or if I simply didn't add the comment correctly. Ultimately, I'd like for someone to review the latest entry for Coupon Sherpa and let me know if further changes are required. Thank you!
Kinoli15 (talk) 18:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
19:59:43, 3 October 2016 review of draft by Seapriestess
[edit]- Seapriestess (talk · contribs)
I'm working on my first page creation. How do I insert a photo that is currently on my desktop?
Does the content box generate itself from the text or do I do that separately?
Thank you!
Seapriestess (talk) 19:59, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Seapriestess. It looks like you've figured out the basics on image uploading and the infobox by now. I've gone over the draft and fixed the remaining formatting errors [1]. However, there's a big problem with those images. They were previously published at Amazon here and cannot be uploaded to Commons or here unless the copyright holder verifies that that they are willing to release them. You have listed the photos at Commons as your own work. Were you the photographer? If not, you cannot release them on behalf of someone else. Even if you took the photos, we cannot host them if they have been previously published elsewhere unless they were published under a compatible license ( e.g. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0) which is clearly visible on the page where they were published. There is more information on this at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials (if you are photographer) and Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission (if you are not). I'll also leave some suggestions on your draft on how to improve it. The current referencing and tone make it unlikely to be accepted in its current state. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)