Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 October 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 25 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 27 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 26

[edit]

01:11:39, 26 October 2020 review of draft by Naijabroads

[edit]


I want to know what other content is needed for the page to be approved. Thanks

Naijabroads (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naijabroads, It is currently pending review. Please be patient. Snowycats (talk) 03:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:02:22, 26 October 2020 review of submission by Thelmaandlouiseltd

[edit]

Is the page Garfield Doakes being submitted for publication? I can only see it if I say Draft:Garfield Doakes but if I search for submissions on October 25, I don't see it. Please advise.

Thelmaandlouiseltd (talk) 02:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thelmaandlouiseltd, Yes, it has been submitted for review. Snowycats (talk) 03:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:33:10, 26 October 2020 review of submission by President-Wiki-Man

[edit]


President-Wiki-Man (talk) 02:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

President-Wiki-Man, Can we help you? No question was asked. Best, Snowycats (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We don't cite anything the subject has created when it comes to determining notability, and YouTube is practically never useful as a source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:10:51, 26 October 2020 review of submission by 2604:2000:E010:1100:A445:719D:15E7:F493

[edit]

For the reasons stated on the talk page. The other examples of similar articles are not the lone reason - I think there is sufficient coverage for a national sports federation that sends teams to the Olympics. But it does in addition support my view. --2604:2000:E010:1100:A445:719D:15E7:F493 (talk) 07:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC) 2604:2000:E010:1100:A445:719D:15E7:F493 (talk) 07:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:58:51, 26 October 2020 review of submission by CSTeller

[edit]

This is my first Wikipedia article and I hope you can assist me in resolving the comments I received from Robert so my article can be published. On the first comment about the picture of Rebecca Hawkins. It Is actually in the public domain as confirmed by the Jackson County Historical Society which sent me scan of this portrait. It is more than 160 years old from a family collection of portraits that a descendent donated to the society who confirmed that there are no restrictions on its use. I did read the lengthy rules and talked to the society to make sure this was acceptable. However, I think I mistakenly uploaded the wrong one from my files. Instead of the one I received from the society, this may be the copy I had sent to the society so they could identify Rebecca Hawkins in their collections. I cannot see much difference in them but it was a copy I found in a publication that used the photo with the society identified as the owner. So I think I selected the wrong one as I was uploading it. It may take me a little because I’m still figuring out how to navigate my way around, but I will figure out how to get the original scan from the society loaded instead as quickly as I can.

On the comment about the work being copied from another source. Please let me clarify that the writing is all my own. I have cited my sources but none of it is copied or even paraphrased from the sources. I wrote it all in my own words (It took weeks of consulting multiple sources). This is a project for a history course I am taking toward a master’s in History). I think it appears copied because I did copy it from what I thought was a sandbox where I could submit the draft from. I wrote it all in word and copied into this sandbox and tried to submit it for review from there. I could not get it to work so I created a separate draft and copied all of my work into the new draft and submittted it from there. I believe this may be why it looks like it is not my original work. I was crushed when I originally thought I was going to have to re-type all of my work again and happy when I figured out how to copy it over with all the references and links I had created in the sandbox. I will do it if that is required, but I hope not. Any tips you can give me on how to get my work into a draft page for submission that reflects that it truly is my own work, which it definitely is, more easily I would be extremely grateful. I will figure out to delete the redirect. It’s good to know what was causing this. I was wondering why that was happening and how to fix it! Again thank you for your comments and any advice you can offer that will help me get them resolved. CSTeller (talk) 14:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CSTeller Your assignment is to successfully write a Wikipedia article? That would be extremely unfair to you as a student as you have limited control over the process. 331dot (talk) 15:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have to submit the article, I am not required to succeed. So, the Professor is not being unfair. I will turn it in as is, but I would like to see it through as this is a subect I have had an interest in for a couple of years and have invested a considerable amount of time in it even before I took the History class. So timing is not critical, I would just like to learn how to do this properly. I am just looking for some guidance so I can satisfy the comments and hopefully get it published. The commentator seems to think it is as noteworthy as I thought it was. There have been many articles and a scholarly work published on her life. I have taken great pains to write it from an objective perspective and cite as many sources as are relevant and where needed. I am struggling with the process though. I think the fact that I have copied some things improperly, I may be giving the impression I have not done my due diligence. This is why I included all the explanation about what I have done to show that I have done my due diligence, I just need help reflecting that through the mechanics of editing properly in Wikipedia.
I am struggling right now trying to figure out how to get the updated version of Rebecca's picture from the Jackson County History Society (in the public domain) loaded into creative commons and back into my new draft page.
Next I will tackle getting the redirect line deleted.
I don't know what to do about the fact that it appears my narrative and references appear copied, because I did copy all of it from what I thought was my sandbox intended for the purpose of creating a draft.
I hope you can follow this. You can probably tell I'm hung up on the mechanics. If any sherpa out there can give me some guidance, I'd be so grateful. CSTeller (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CSTeller: The comments on the draft say it was copied from multiple books, not a sandbox -- I myself have copied content from my Sandbox with no issues. I recommend pulling up the books and comparing them to your own work, to make sure you haven't accidentally plagiarized anything (I myself have done this while having the article and the work/essay I am trying to write side by side -- makes it very easy). sam1370 (talk · contribs) 16:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:CSTeller - I have also replied to you on the talk page of the draft, Draft talk:Rebecca Hawkins. I am inferring that the draft consists of work that you have copied from papers or books that you wrote. That takes care of the matter of copyright, but there are still major matters of style. It is not written in the style of a Wikipedia article, and has far too much background material. An article on Rebecca Hawkins should be a brief biography (stressing brief) describing her life, without providing lengthy background material about the Western United States in the nineteenth century, and your draft is more background than biography. The first style issue that a reviewer notes is that the draft lacks a proper lede sentence of the form "Rebecca Hawkins was a ..." (Western pioneer woman who was tried for murdering her husband?). That is easy to add. But the draft needs to be trimmed and put into the form of a short Wikipedia biography without a lot of background.
Do not worry about details such as the status of the photograph, or the redirect. You appear to think that the details are what are preventing acceptance of the draft. Rewriting and shortening the draft is what prevents acceptance of the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:CSTeller - I put a hatnote at the top of your draft to deal with the existing redirect for the manga character. Did it ever occur to you that maybe I put the hatnote there because I knew what I was doing, or at least a little bit about the oddities of Wikipedia? Did it ever occur to you that maybe deleting the hatnote was not the way to deal with the existing redirect? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:07, 26 October 2020 review of submission by BenNeumann23

[edit]


The information regarding the coach has been sourced from the official Thai League website, which also has the managerial statistics.

BenNeumann23 (talk) 15:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You were repeatedly told by the reviewers on the draft itself that the draft doesn't satisfy our notability criteria for football players and coaches. There is no presumption of notability for coaches/players not in a top-level league (in this case, T1). Even then, statlines can't be used for notability (too sparse). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:09:58, 26 October 2020 review of submission by CSTeller

[edit]


CSTeller (talk) 17:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CSTeller: The comments on the draft say it was copied from multiple books, not a sandbox -- I myself have copied content from my Sandbox with no issues. I recommend pulling up the books and comparing them to your own work, to make sure you haven't accidentally plagiarized anything (I myself have done this while having the article and the work/essay I am trying to write side by side -- makes it very easy). sam1370 (talk · contribs) 16:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response above. It is not my practice to copy and paste from an original source and I am very careful about this as a rule. But I know that it is possible to rephrase in such a way as to copy another author's work as you describe without intending to. So, I doublehecked the sources thoroughly once more as you suggested before I submitted my response. I did not see any of my narrative that comes directly from either of these sources or any of the other sources that I used either. I know the reviewers must be extrememly busy, but I would greatly appreciate it if the specific narrative in question could be shown to me so that I can make any necessary corrections. CSTellerCSTeller (talk) 17:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:58:13, 26 October 2020 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:811C:6901:5422:A30E:7F6:4AD0

[edit]

I believe this flag deserves a review as a special representation for federal capital territories. Thanks! 2A00:23C7:811C:6901:5422:A30E:7F6:4AD0 (talk) 22:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


23:12:39, 26 October 2020 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:811C:6901:5422:A30E:7F6:4AD0

[edit]

This was the Richest and Largest State with its own Army and was supported by Mountbatten and Churchill. 2A00:23C7:811C:6901:5422:A30E:7F6:4AD0 (talk) 23:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_October_26&oldid=986458089"