Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 December 25
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < December 24 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 26 > |
| 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. |
December 25
[edit]01:45:31, 25 December 2017 review of submission by Enchufla Con Clave
[edit]
1. I typed in a load of text in this initially and it disappeared when I hit "Publish"? Any idea why?
2. I just had the above article accepted as "Start Class". I looked it up on the Grading Scheme page, but found the generic advice on there a little difficult to understand as applied to my article. I'm very much a beginner at wikipedia and article writing. If anyone could give me any specific feedback to start me on my way, that would be excellent.
One of my major problems is that much detailed and well researched articles have already been written about this church on the web by English Heritage and Nottingham University. It didn't seem right to copy and paste or basically just paraphrase what they said. Is it good enough to just put a link / ref to such articles?
Also - I'm not really a writer - I'm a software developer :-)
Enchufla Con Clave (talk) 01:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Enchufla Con Clave. I have no idea about the disappearing text. It isn't a problem I've heard of before. As a software developer, you know the drill. First, is it repeatable? If so, see mw:How to report a bug.
- Now that Church Of St Edmund, Mansfield Woodhouse is in article space, any number of editors may pitch in and improve it. It is no longer in the scope of Articles for creation; we reviewers must turn our attention to the thousands of other waiting drafts.
- There's nothing wrong with being start-class. To move up, the prose will need to be expanded several fold. You're right to avoid copying sources. If summarizing sources isn't what you enjoy, leave it for someone else. Just list any sources that might be useful in expanding the article - under external links, further reading, or on the article's talk page. I've left a basket of links on your talk page that may give you ideas about ways to improve the article, or to improve some of our 5.5 million other articles, most of which need just as much work. You could add an appropriate WikiProject or two to the talk page, add more categories, and replace the gallery (which has too many images for an article of this size) with a {{commonscat}} template that leads to them. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:48, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- The above is very helpful advice. I've also left some architecture-specific ideas on the article's Talkpage. KJP1 (talk) 08:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
08:31:51, 25 December 2017 review of submission by Gaurav Walzade
[edit]Why my article was declined? Gaurav Walzade (talk) 08:31, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- If you have a look at the article, you'll see that it is blank, there is nothing in it. Wikipedia doesn't accept blank articles. One other thing - what did you want to put in it? If you're planning to write an article about yourself, Wikipedia:Autobiography you should know that this is strongly discouraged as you may not be Notable and it's very likely you won't write from a Neutral Point of View Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 09:42, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
17:41:18, 25 December 2017 review of submission by Ninefornine9
[edit]- Ninefornine9 (talk · contribs)
Still awaiting feedback
Ninefornine9 (talk) 17:41, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Ninefornine9. Draft:Cultural Assimilation between Haiti and the Dominican Republic was submitted for review 2 days ago. The backlog is approximately 60 days. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help improve Wikipedia while you wait. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
18:52:03, 25 December 2017 review of submission by Fvultier
[edit]
My mathematical article on complex random vectors was declined. I do not understand the meaning of the reason "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.". All the information I got from the two books referenced in the article and for most theorems ect I give references with page numbers. In what sense is the article not adequately supported by reliable sources? Are the sources to bad or are there not enough sources? Is the way how I cite the sources formally not correct?
Fvultier (talk) 18:52, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Fvultier. I agree those references should be enough. I'm not sure why your draft was declined. I've accepted it now; thanks for your contribution and I do hope you'll continue editing Wikipedia! – Joe (talk) 17:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)