Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, FeedShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subjectReviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives

Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

• This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
  • For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
  • Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
• Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
• Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.

Ask a new question Please check back often for answers.

• Top of page
• Table of Contents
• Today's posts
• Bottom of page

May 16

I do not know the my article is passed or not

Hi, I want to know the exact condition of the article "Tao Jingzhou", is it deleted or declined? Or it is being reviewed now? I have waited for two days for the result. 204.155.226.3 (talk) 07:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.155.226.3 (talk) 07:38, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The draft article is HERE. It is waiting for a review. Two days is not a long time to wait, some articles are waiting for over one week at present. All the same, you have not addressed any of the problems described by the previous reviewer so, in order not to waste your time, please follow their advice. Sionk (talk) 11:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Function Points

I had published a draft version of the submitted article in my blog fuctionpointanalysis.wordpress.com, I have deleted the blog, and have resubmitted a version that is revamped, with complete references, and as suggested by the reviewer Chris along with the advantages and disadvantages of applying the same. Being my first submission, I request that you could help me sort this out.

Thanks,

Kind Regards, Ruben. Rubengeradmathew (talk) 08:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Rubengeradmathew

 Declined. Insufficient sourcing to establish notability. See WP:VRS Pol430 talk to me 21:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Safetray

Hi there,

I've submitted an article for creation - Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Safetray - but I can't see it in the list of submitted articles over any of the last three days, and the box to say it's been submitted is still at the bottom of the page, while the top box still says it's not submitted. Could someone put my mind at ease that it has been successfully submitted, or point me in the direction of how to fix it if it hasn't?

Thanks,

Carolinewhitham (talk) 10:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Carolinewhitham

Anything with "Categories: Pending AfC submissions" at the bottom has been submitted. This appears to be fine. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 12:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Accepted Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 15:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Kinkreet, really appreciate it! Carolinewhitham (talk) 09:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Carolinewhitham

Please help me do my homework

hi im doing a project in school about the celts im wondering if u will tell as much as possible about where they came from and the story tellers please. !!!! i need your help as fast as you can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.200.37 (talk) 14:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

We will not do homework for you. Read the article on Celts and [1] and do it yourself. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 14:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

i need help to intrepid fmla, family law. 167.234.14.241 (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC) donna

does F. M. L. A. also include protection for single parents caring for dependent children without serious health problems?167.234.14.241 (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC) donna

Please use the Reference desk for this sort of queries, thanks. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 15:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Information Based measure of Disagreement

In the Review of my article (Articles for creation/Information Based measure of Disagreement)a section has been identified as posing a potential copyright issue, as a copy or modification of the text from the source(s) below http://www.dcc.fc.up.pt/disagreement/other.php) (Duplication Detector report)

I want to clarify that this page http://www.dcc.fc.up.pt/disagreement/other.php was also writen by me and it was a draft page of my page http://disagreement.med.up.pt

Now I deleted the draft page http://www.dcc.fc.up.pt/disagreement/other.php and I edited the text of my article to avoid any potential copyright problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csantos.cristina (talk • contribs) 15:32, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NIPS School of Hotel Management

How to Post Photographs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.46.213 (talk) 18:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Files for upload. France3470 (talk) 21:56, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

How can I adjust rejected article.... (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harmony By Karate (Chowa-Kai Karatedo))

Hi, this is in reference to the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harmony By Karate (Chowa-Kai Karatedo) I have submitted it twice now, in an effort to satisfy the reference requirements, and it has been rejected both times. My intention with submitting this article is genuine--it is not for the purpose of promoting the organization, etc. However, this karate school is a present-day part of the lineage of the Shorinjiryu‎ Karatedo. I have also seen on Wikipedia articles about other martial arts schools. Therefore, I do not understand what more I can do to publish this article, and feel it is a significant and encyclopedia-worthy topic. Please do advise as I have put a lot of work into writing this article according to Wikipedia guidelines.

Thank you very much for your time.

FarYnsand (talk) 20:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Accepted Needs quite a bit of work... Why are random letters capitalized? Pol430 talk to me 21:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

May 17

Hello, I am an employee at Chicago White Metal Casting Inc. and I tried to create a page for our business. We are an established metal casting company and this year marks our 75th anniversary. You can see our website here: www.cwmdiecast.com. All the information I put into this article is from company documents about the history of the company and we would really like to get a page up, especially since we're one of the most recognized metal casting compannies in existance with a rich history and great story.

Thanks,

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiWhiteMetal (talk • contribs) 11:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

 Declined. See comment on submission. Pol430 talk to me 22:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Personalized Audio Messaging

Hello I am looking to contribute to the Wikipedia community and am having difficulty identifying what I may have done incorrectly. The contribution I submitted was: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Personalized Audio Messaging and this appears to be declined for not adequately supporting through sources.

I have several sources cited throughout the entry as well as more general material at the end. What else should I have provided? Is it that I did not reference those sources properly? This is a rapidly emerging field and is becoming more and more mainstream. How do I revise my submission to match the Wikipedia requirements?

Wmiller9 (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)wmiller9Wmiller9 (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I left a comment at the submission page. Hopefully that will give you more of an idea of what your next steps should be. The key is really digging up the best possible sources you can, preferably, books, newspaper articles and journals. If the material cannot be adequately sourced it might be best to omit it entirely. France3470 (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Don Gutterideg: Poet

Hi!

I'm puzzled by the reviewer's comments. There already are footnotes in the article. Is it a question of them being improperly formatted?

Are the footnotes the only concern?

Thanks

Floorwik (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)floorwick

It looks to me like you have 'inline' citations, but not in the normal Wikipedia format. It may be a good idea to ask the reviewer on their Talk page what additional concerns they had. However, if it was me reviewing the article I would suggest that the the article needs at least one more news or book source, to establish the notability of Gutterideg. The article currently relies only on the Oxford Companion. Sionk (talk) 18:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Neoweb

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Neoweb My intial submission was rejected. I made corrections to the original article and wanted to explain why i think this entry meets the Golden Rule; however I did not see any place or way to enter my explanation (TALK?) to the reviewer who will eventually decide on my article's fate (after pressing SAVE and RESUBMIT) YSchary (talk) 14:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

When I get to the live help chat screen and after some check in, I am requested to enter my question, but cannot type or make any entry on the screen.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by YSchary (talk • contribs) 14:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Accepted. Pol430 talk to me 22:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bruce Clark (Legal Scholar)

I wish to edit but at the bottom of the page the phrase appears bracketed in code "Please don't change anything and press save." What is the significance of this and can you estimate when I will be able to edit? Thank you.--Evarose3 (talk) 16:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The message is just to stop people accidentally deleting the submit for review box, not to prevent one from editing. Unfortunately because of how the system is, new tags appear at the bottom instead of at the top where they should be (which is rather confusing for all involved). There is a bot which is supposed to come along and format these tags but it often runs slower than one would like. I've manually reorganized so things should be clearer now. Hope that helps, France3470 (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

It does help a lot. And so promptly. Many thanks. Best,--Evarose3 (talk) 17:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RF Binder

I recently submitted an article about a public relations agency in New York that was turned down because of notability. I disagree with the decision. This agency has offices across the country, has won numerous awards, and has many notable clients. While it is a subsidiary of a larger operation that already has a Wikipedia page (Ruder Finn), I truly believe the agency deserves its own page. What recommendations do you have for continuing to try to have this published? Thanks. Gjh1588 (talk) 18:15, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually it was declined on verifiability grounds. The sources you have provided are not reliable enough or numerous enough to verify the claims you have made about the company's notability, or establish its notability per the WP:GNG. Pol430 talk to me 22:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Yoga Swing

Good day, I am in the process of rewriting a submission due to lack of verifiable resources and the tone of the article. Please let me know if we´re headed in the right direction and what the article needs still? Thank you! Marchild (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Get rid of 'names and terms', 'styles' and 'set up and use' sections. Wikipedia is not a directory or how-to guide. Pol430 talk to me 22:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

May 18

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MyMajors

Wikipedia talk:Articles for Creation/MyMajors Hello, my contribution Wikipedia talk:Articles for Creation/MyMajors was reviewed, but I had a few questions.

The reviewer stated "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia."

I was hoping for more clarification on why my current resources were not notable or verifiable. I referenced the notable and verifiable pages, but do not understand why those references are not accepted. I have an external reference to a newspaper, national news media, state school district, award for the contribution topic, and 11 total resources to the topic. I need some help on what other types of articles or resources I should include or find, or if there was any other reason the article did not meet the criteria based on the reviewers decision.

Emiliocallie3 (talk) 21:39, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Emiliocallie3

It is a borderline decision in my view. The MSN article is very good, principly about MyMajors and its creator. The Kansas City article talks about MyMajors, though it isn't the principle subject. Because MyMajors seems to be a business as well as a web tool, Wikipedia editors will be 'twitchy' about accepting articles unless they are very convincingly sourced. Maybe one more news/magazine reference would tip the balance? Sionk (talk) 00:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Down Autograss Racing Club

Hi, I have tried to use the help page and direct contact but had problems entering it, anyway: I submitted an article on Down Autograss, of which I am the founder member (Cavan Ferrie) the submission was refused on the grounds of non verification. This is the 25th anniversary of the formation of the club and is surely by now an established organisation under the regulation of a national governing body (national autograss sport association) I can verify my ID and therefore as the founder, also any factual information. I trust this information will resolve the problem/issue Kind regards, Cavan Ferrie (Cavan in Crete) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavan in Crete (talk • contribs) 10:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

No, we require that submissions have references listed therein, that 'verify' what you have written. These references need to be reliable and independent, several of them. See the verifiability policy and WP:VRS. Pol430 talk to me 17:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IC 840 HYDERABAD-NEW DELHI

Hi there... regarding the article I wrote I added 2 different references and still an automatic reply appears saying that's not enough... why? Can you help me please! I was involved in that incident that the article speaks about, so i care about it. thank you rafeekRafeekwal (talk) 12:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Not notable enough for a stand alone article, per WP:AIRCRASH. Merge with Indira Gandhi International Airport. Pol430 talk to me 17:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Logicalis.

Hi there,

I am curious as to why this has been rejected; the company is notable as it is a top 50 (24th) largest IT company in the US, it employs several thousand people globally and has numerous awards this year - all referenced from independent sources... any clues as to why it is not considered notable and the references are being ignored?

BenWalden (talk) 12:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Accepted passes the AfD test. Pol430 talk to me 17:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Bruce Clark (Legal Scholar)

I asked a question (#7.4) and got a quick and satisfying answer but now I keep getting Help Desk matters on my watchlist that have nothing to do with me. How can I stop getting these notices? Thanks.--Evarose3 (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

When viewing this page, click the 'unwatch' tab at the top. Pol430 talk to me 16:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Kirby

Hello, i have posted an article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Richard_Kirby. it was rejected due to lack of reliable sources. I have been folowing your directions and added reliable sources but the article is still not approved. Mayby noone checked it after I added resources? Please help me Timeframehd (talk) 13:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Kirby's 'notability' is also a major problem. We're looking for independent and reliable news/magazine/book sources that talk about him in depth, not mentions on lists, or credits at the back of books. Without establishing that Kirby has been widely talked about in such sources, the article is unlikely to be accepted. Sionk (talk) 21:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. Please can you advise if you have read the extracts about Kirby from Sir David Attenborough's books, Keith Scholey's book (the ex Head of the BBC Natural History Unit and Philippa Forrester's book (she is a high profile UK BBC television presenter) Sir Attenborough says..."Thankfully we were able to recruit two cameramen of near genius, Richard Kirby and Tim Shepherd. They welcomed the technical problems involved. The more ambitious the scripts we produced the more they seemed to delight in working out how to obtain the shots we had asked for." He goes on to say "More came when Richard Kirby and Tim Shepherd joined the group. Their particular and very rare expertise lies in time-lapse photography. My wonder at the sequences Richard and Tim produced is equaled only by my admiration for the resourcefulness and ingenuity that was needed to produce them." There are many more such quotes from Sir David on the table provided. Mr Scholey says"...and she would need a camera operator with an all encompassing knowledge of photographic techniques. Such a genius is Richard Kirby, a cameraman who has honed his skills on a wide range of exacting subjects, from microscopic algae to displaying birds of paradise. Richard has always taken on technically demanding films and was one of the mainstays on David Attenborough’s last major series “The Private Life of Plants”, filming exquisite time-lapse sequences which have changed our view of plants for ever. He is also a meticulous field naturalist and recently demonstrated his talents as one of the two cameramen filming previously unrecorded displays of birds of paradise in the remotest parts of New Guinea for one of David’s most remarkable programmes “Attenborough in Paradise” Philippa Forrester says..."Richard Kirby is, among other things, a very good macro cameraman, which means he does the really close-up small stuff. This was something that Charlie had neither the time nor the talent (his words not mine) to manage. Richard had shot some beautiful sequences for the Natural History Unit so it was very exciting when he agreed to work with us." Please can you tell me are these not "independent and reliable news/magazine/book sources that talk about him 'in depth'" There is plenty of depth if you read the remaining extracts from Sir David's books. I am not sure what more we can give you ? Please adviseTimeframehd (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

These extracts don't talk about Kirby in-depth. They say, in an effusive way, that he is an excellent photographer and cameraman. Being excellent at your job isn't, of itself, a reason to be written about extensively in Wikipedia. From what I can see, most of the remainder of the article is poorly sourced or unsourced - for example all the biographical info about Kirby and his family is unsourced, which is a big 'no-no' on Wikipedia. Much of his filmography is unsourced or sourced to primary sources.

We also have to bear in mind that you talk about yourself as "we" and your username is the same as Kirby's company. Editors here are going to be wary that you might be using Wikipedia for promotional purposes. If you have a conflict of interest you need to declare it and be particularly careful to contribute in a way that is neutral, non-promotional and well-sourced. Sionk (talk) 13:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brian stacey

Dear reviewer

I am having trouble finding other references on line for Brian Stacey, mostly due to the fact that he died in 1996 and there is not much on-line from then or earlier.

At this stage the draft webpage relies mostly on a report from The Age newspaper. The Age is one of Australia's oldest and most reputable newspapers - surely it is a reliable source?

The draft article includes many objective facts that go to establish Mr Stacey's notability - for example that he conducted various high profile musical performances in Australia, such as "Phantom of the Opera" etc. These are objective facts referenced in one of Australia's most reputable newspapers. I do not understand why that is not enough for publication - it seems no less supported than many other article on Wikipedia.

I would be most obliged if you could please review the draft article again.

Neapolitankids (talk) 13:59, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Reviewers are very unlikely to accept an article without multiple sources i.e. newspapers, magazines or authoritative books. They do not need to be online sources, though if they are offline please try and provide enough information to make verification a possibility. Sionk (talk) 02:04, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

My baby brother in Columbia S.C. prison

<redacted> due to BLP issues. Wikipedia is completely the wrong venue for this kind of thing. Pol430 talk to me 17:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

May 19

Resubmitted article

Hi - I'd be really grateful if the article i've written on the Transport (Conduct) Regulations could be assessed and passed this time please. The subject matter is clearly notable. Conduct on public transport is a major issue in Victoria and the regulations are one of the prime control measures over misbehaviours. They are notable on that ground alone let alone that thousands of people are fined under them every day and would appreciate a lay explanation of the mater. I've added some general references, including extracts from newspaper articles, which support these points. As a general observation, can I say that it is really deflating when you have your article rejected with minimal feedback. You spend hours sometimes days writing the things and adding all sorts of text, formatting and links and you get what seems to be a cursory examination and a rejection of a line or two. It seems entirely contrary to the purpose of the Wikipedia project. No doubt many would be contributors have simply given up after this new editorial policy came into play. Anyway, please reconsider... Thanks Manticore83 (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

A topic's notability is established when there is significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. The article has some secondary sources that do not mention the Transport (Conduct) Regulations 2005 (the Herald Sun articles [2][3]), and the only sources mentioning the article's topic are the regulations themselves and the regulatory impact statement, both of which are primary sources. Therefore the topic does not appear to be notable. Huon (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I've revised this article again. This time it includes a heading with the title "Notability of the regulations" and references to recent newspaper articles (from Melbourne's only two daily newspapers I might add) and extracts from those articles which specifically mention the regulations. I could add hundreds more references but this is entirely unnecessary in my view. I ask that the article be reviewed again please. A review of the current editorial policy though is more in order though. Manticore83 (talk) 15:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

To me that looks like passing mentions, not significant coverage; the Herald Sun does not discuss the regulations at all beyond citing a website for what they supposedly say on a single subject, and The Age is little better. These sources are not detailed enough to allow us to write an article on the regulations, and articles (or even just major sections) should not be based on primary sources per WP:PRIMARY. As an aside, lengthy paragraphs of quotes raise issues of copyright violation; we'd have to reword that. If you want to change editorial policy on notability, WT:N would probably be the place for such a discussion, but I doubt you'd be successful. Huon (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I won't take up the offer. You clearly don't want the article. You asked for secondary sources which I provided. Those secondary sources are from the two daily newspapers here with circulations of over 500,000 . Not sure how much more public you can get than that. You seem to think this is hicksville down here. It's actually a State of 5 million people with a major city (Melbourne) of nearly 4 million, larger of course than most US cities. The city itself has been voted as the world's most liveable on many occasions. I could spend more hours gathering other material (if you do a google search, there are thousands of references to this document) about something that affects millions of people each day and under which thousands of people are fined. But, frankly, why would I waste my time any further actually trying to inform people about this subject when the editors here are as they are. You have to hope that somebody sets up an online encyclopaedia project someday. One that actually believes in people giving their time freely with an encouraging editorial staff to contribute to the sum of human knowledge... Manticore83 (talk) 23:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saint John Labatt Trojans Rugby Football Club

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saint John Labatt Trojans Rugby Football Club

Hello,

Within the past couple weeks I submitted our Trojans RFC History to put on Wikipedia. Wikipedia did not accept my submission because it was copied from the trojansrfc.com History section. I am the president of the Trojans RFC and we authorize you to use this submission. It's our best document of our history that we have. Is there any possible way this submission can be used?? Please advise. Thank you.

Peter Fitzgerald President Saint John Labatt Trojans RFC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.166.53.190 (talk) 02:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

To be used on Wikipedia, the text would have to be released under a license compatible to Wikipedia's own CC-BY-SA license. If you want to do so, you would have to send a mail confirming the licensing information to "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org". For details see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. But since the tone of that copyrighted text is rather unencyclopedic (talking about "our club", for example), rewriting it would probably necessary anyway. Huon (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Regional Airline Association

I don't think I'm adding my redirect correctly. Nor are the instructions on the Wikipedia:Redirect page clear enough for my peanut mind. --XB70Valyrie (talk) 03:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you really want to add a redirect. If you want to turn your article into a redirect, the line of code

#REDIRECT [[RAA]]

would have to be put at the very top of the article (before the {{AFC submission}} template), but then the article's text would no longer be readable; instead everybody trying to look at it would automatically be pointed to the RAA page. A redirect page itself looks like this: Redirect page to RAA. But since the RAA page contains no information about the Regional Airline Association, redirecting the latter to the former would not be of any help to our readers. If you really want to request a redirect and not an article, you can do so here. Huon (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks Huon. So many little hidden wikipedia: pages. First new article for me, so I appreciate the help. I submitted the redirect, so I guess it's time to submit the new article as well. Best, --XB70Valyrie (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chuckleton Williams

Chuckleton Williams was born on september 1, 1939. he was born in an African villiage just outside the country of Rwanda. Both of his parents were leaders in the tribe. In 1945, his tribe was attacked by an unknown tribe. Both Chuckleton's parennts were killed. Cuckleton was one of the lone survivors of his tribe. He decided to leave and start a new life. He travled by foot to South Africa. While on his journey, to make some money, he began work as a giggolo. Once he reached South Africa, he traveled to the USA by flight. Now he serves as director for local plays around the area of Albequerqe, New Mexico. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.53.164 (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

What kind of help do you require? Huon (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/This Day Will Tell

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/This_Day_Will_Tell is the article draft in question. Is there a certain number of inline citations I need? Also, if I have links in the "References" section, do I need to use info from those references in my article? I'm thinking that could be what's holding me up. --Whoisscott (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2012 (UTC)Whoisscott

You need inline citations for anything controversial/likely to be challenged and any direct quotes. However, your sources are generally a problem at the moment. Sources are used for verifying the information in the article. They are also used to prove the notability of the subject, as per the 'golden rule'. See WP:CITEHOW to see what sort of information your need to tell us about your sources. Sionk (talk) 20:54, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

May 20

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Air Safaris (NZ)

How do I attach a photo to my article as it needs a picture thanks.CHCBOY (talk) 15:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

You can upload an image to Wikipedia at Special:Upload. For more detailed help on uploading images to Wikipedia, have a look at WP:Uploading images. Please make sure that the image is either free content or usable under Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content. If the image has a free license (such as CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, or GFDL, you can instead upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. Once you uploaded the image (either to Commons or to Wikipedia itself), you can add it to the article by using code like this:

[[File:Example.jpg|thumb|left|Image description]]

That will produce a thumbnail on the left of the text. The airline infobox also can display an image (that's supposed to be the airline's logo); just substitute the line

| image =

by

| image = Example.jpg

and, if necessary adjust the image size by adding

| image_size = 250px

or whatever size looks good in the template. There is also a tutorial with more information on the wikicode for images. Huon (talk) 16:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Three Skeleton Key article submitted

Please delete my submission of a new article called "Three Skeleton Key". I no longer need it. It is currently pending.

There was already an article with that name, but it was only a redirect page to Escape (radio program). "Three Skeleton Key" was an episode on "Escape".

I deleted the redirect code in the existing article and replaced it with the coding for my article.

Thank you. Pfa (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

May 21

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sam Kwang Elementary

Hi, yeah, my school wants to me to make a wikipedia page for them because they're Korean. I have tried to send this in but for some reason I keep getting told that I haven't referenced it correctly. The website should be enough. It's an elementary school... Please, help me make them happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessecpence (talk • contribs) 03:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The topic of your submission does not appear to be notable. Articles need to be referenced adequately with reliable sources that are independent of the subject - this does not include the school's website, as it is affiliated with the subject. The article is also very short and provides insufficient context. →Bmusician 03:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Proximagen Group plc

Last time I was on the live help chat the feedback was that the page was fine but to add dates to references, but after re-submiting I still dont get approved. Any feedback someone can give to improve it please? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Proximagen_Group_plc

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Proximagen Group plc

Thank you

Itguyatwork (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I've accepted this submission. joe•roe^t•c 18:32, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Karol Berger

I don't understand why my review was not accepted. I do cite reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophia432sophia234 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The sources you cite are all primary sources: Books written by Berger, his own university, the websites of the societies whose awards he has won. What would be required to establish notability are secondary sources, sources not affiliated with the subject. Was there independent news coverage of the awards? Has someone written a book about Berger, or discussing his views? I expect such sources should exist, but we'd have to add them to the article to clearly establish notability. Huon (talk) 14:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this helpful response. I have now added several secondary sources. Would it be possible to approve the article now ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophia432sophia234 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Extra sources are always nice, but I think in this case they weren't strictly necessary. Per WP:ACADEMIC, there doesn't have to be secondary sources directly about the academic; we can just use reliable sources to show their scholarly work has been highly influential. That Berger holds a named chair, is a member of a prestigious scholarly society (the Polish Academy of Sciences) and has been the recipient of several prestigious awards is evidence that his work has been highly influential and therefore shows notability. Primary sources are perfectly acceptable to verify those facts. joe•roe^t•c 18:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Androzene Article

Hello, How long is an article normally under review for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Androzene (talk • contribs) 18:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I see your submission has been reviewed now, but I'll answer anway: usually a few days at least, we have a very large backlog and a shortage of volunteers to review submissions. joe•roe^t•c 19:00, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Coralhead

HI, I have been editing the draft above. I have added links to other wikipedia articles in the body of the article. Can you tell me if I have added too many? Are some types of links preferred or discouraged?

For example I have linked to terms like alternative media and public interest, which I think can use explanations.

I have linked to organizations like NPR.

I have linked to well known people who are in wikipedia like Michael Pollan.

Are those all useful links or have I gone overboard?

OR should I just wait until I submit the article for review and get feedback then?

Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time and trouble.

Frogtoed (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

There are written guidelines in the manual of style, but I think you have the knack of it: link where you think a reader might want more information on a related topic, or explanation of a specialised term; don't link unrelated topics or self-explanatory terms.

The AfC process is mainly about determining whether the topic is suitable for inclusion and the article conforms to our broadest standards. We don't get hung up on style issues like under- or over-linking. But you're welcome to seek feedback on that sort of thing while the article is still at AfC (either here or on the submission itself), or later (at the main help desk).

On another topic, the "See also" section conventionally contains links to other Wikipedia articles on related topics that aren't linked. Links to other websites should go in an "External links" section. Again, there's a manual of style section explaining in more detail. joe•roe^t•c 19:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Picturepark Digital Asset Management Software

Re: Articles for creation/Picturepark Digital Asset Management Software

This article was just declined with the references being cited, but I'm not sure what I could do to improve the references. This is the entirety of the public information that's available on the company. Further, the statements made in the article are not outlandish or promotional in nature, and all can be verified at the links provided.

This is my first time submitting an article to Wikipedia, so perhaps this is something simple that I've misunderstood.

Any suggestions you can offer would be appreciated.

Thank you!

David Diamond — Preceding unsigned comment added by AirDiamond (talk • contribs) 18:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The problem with your submission is not that the facts aren't cited (it meets the verifiability criteria, in Wikipedia jargon) or that the content is promotional in tone, it's the notability of the product itself. The basic rule of thumb for notability is that the topic of an article should be discussed in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the topic. It's confusing because we use references for different things – to verify facts and to show the topic is worthy of inclusion – and a reference might be fine for one purpose but unsuitable for the other. In this case, your references verify the information in the article, but because they're directly associated with its topic (the official website of the product and the company), they can't be used to show the topic is notable.

If, as you say, the official websites are all the publicly available information that exists, I'd suggest that neither the product or the company is notable. joe•roe^t•c 19:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gletcher

I received the message below regarding the creation of my article on Gletcher:

"The reviewer left the following comment about this submission: This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

I would be happy to give references and cite sources for this article, but this article is about a brand new company, and there is no way to reference it. If there are any suggestions on what steps I can take to get this article put on Wikipedia considering the circumstances, I would greatly appreciate your assistance.

Thank you, Dinulya123Dinulya123 (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

If the company is brand new and nobody have written about it, then it is not notable enough for inclusion. Wikipedia is not a directory of every company and practically speaking, as a tertiary source, we can't write about something if we have no sources to cite. joe•roe^t•c 20:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, but I just realized that I made a mistake. It should say that Gletcher is a brand new product, and not a brand new company. I apologize for my error.

Therefore, since it is still brand new and original, there is no place to get references or cite it. The only reference I can offer is a link to this product's website.

So again, if someone can please advise me on what I can do next to get my article about the new product Gletcher on Wikipedia considering the circumstances surrounding it, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you, Dinulya123Dinulya123 (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Being a brand new prioduct without reliable secondary sources still means that it's probably not (yet) notable and that Wikipedia should not (yet) have an article on it. Wait until some independent reviews in reliable publications are available, then write an article based on those sources. Huon (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Faulty Expressions

This page "Editing Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk (new section)" is too cryptic to understand. I know you understand it but the rest of us do not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsalsburg (talk • contribs) 22:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. What exactly was unclear, and how could we improve it? Huon (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Faulty Expressions

My submission was rejected with the following message...Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Faulty Expressions .................... The reviewer left the following comment about this submission:

   The content of this submission includes material that meets 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. Thank you. 

....................

The reviewer seems to contradict himself, the message above says that my submission meets the standard but then it says to cite sources using footnotes, I am the source of the material, what next is there to do? My submission is based on the faults people make in Speech. Words as sounds coming from someones mouth cannot be reproduced on the printed page, only text can be written. The text in my submission is logic, accumulated over years of careful observation of people speaking on TV, Radio, and in Public. Example; the word "Burnt" is in the Dictionary, but is obsolete, as is the word "Whilst". You will not hear People speak; "Whilst I go to Market, fetch a Pale of Water" for the same reason, the Word, "Burnt" should not be used, unless you are writing in the style of 16th Century England.

Faulty Expressions are defined nowhere in Literature. A book referenced in my Submission contains a Chapter: "Glossary of Faulty Expressions" which decades ago, may have inspired me, but my Submission contains none of the content in that book. My Submission is original thought. Jsalsburg (talk) 23:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

That note means that there's content which should have inline citations - it meets the minimum standard for material that requires inline citations. Your own observation unfortunately is not suitable as the basis for a Wikipedia article. We cannot accept original research; that's one of Wikipedia's core policies. Instead, article content must be based on reliable secondary sources, and inline citations are necessary to show which part is based on what source. Otherwise our readers would have an exceedingly hard time trying to verify the article's content. Huon (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

May 22

Qualian Technologies Private Limited

Qualian Technologies Private Limited involved in Outsourced Development Activities Of the US customers headquaters in Chennai,India.And Also involved in Enterprise Solutions Implementation for Small and Medium scale Industries in India.Qualian is Certified Partner of Open Bravo,Developing Industry specific ERP solutions based on Open Bravo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roopa Raj (talk • contribs) 06:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I have moved your submission to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Qualian Technologies Private Limited. It has no references and needs some reliable secondary sources to establish the company's notability. As it stood it would have been eligible for speedy deletion. Huon (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Guy Benveniste

I have provided 13 references you do not want me to add as references the many many published reviews of his work that appeared in professional journals I hope!Nadialebon (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, the references should be turned into true inline references by using the <ref></ref> tags. Secondly, all but two of the references are primary sources; reviews of his work published in professional journals would indeed be highly preferable to Benveniste's own books and articles. (References 12 and 13 also seem to be the same, except one is the Chinese translation? Why not use the English version twice?) Huon (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

About my SAMYG article

i don't know what to remove/add on my Article to make it thru the Wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SamYG been denied 4x. Please Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdnghtluv (talk • contribs) 08:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The article needs reliable secondary sources to allow readers to verify its content and to establish the subject's notability. Currently the sources do not support much of the article's content, at least one of them (the blog) is clearly not reliable, and furthermore the article's tone is anything but encyclopedic ("umm..."?). Huon (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Why can't I see Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BackTweets in the Submissions list?

Hi,

I created Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BackTweets on May 20, 2012, yet I can't find it in any of the bot's lists for articles submitted/ reviewed/ rejected...

Why is this? Please help!

Thanks, Sarah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezoff (talk • contribs) 10:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I have added a submission template to the article; it should be added to the list of pending reviews as soon as the bot updating the list catches up. You might want to re-check the references; one pointed to an image on the Wikimedia Commons that has since been deleted as a copyright violation. Huon (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/H. J. High Construction

I am writing an article about H. J. High Construction. I want first of all to apologize to Excirial (I believe he's the one who reviewed my article) if I seemed pushy about getting responses to my question. I am new to Wikipedia and I had no idea what kind of backlog editors face in reviewing articles. Unfortunately, I am one of the least tech-savvy people on the planet and I find Wikipedia very confusing and hard to manage (yep, I'm that technically incompetent). I am currently revising my article according to the editor's instructions, including formatting my references in an acceptable style (using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Referencing_for_beginners_with_citation_templates). I have another question though:

Is there some kind of template for the boilerplate information I see on other construction companies articles? Specifically, the "Contents" box and the box that includes information like the TYPE of company; INDUSTRY; FOUNDED; HEADQUARTERS; KEY PEOPLE; SERVICES: EMPLOYEES and WEBSITE? I imagine the answer is quite simple but, being the techno idiot I am, I am unable to find it. I would appreciate your showing me how to create these templates so I can finish my article and resubmit it.

Thank you very much for your help and (in my case) patience.

Dan McDonald D102653A (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The template used by the construction company articles I just had a look at is {{Infobox company}}. See this example of the template in use and the parameters it takes; Hoar Construction shows the finished result. If in doubt, you can leave most of the parameters empty. The preview is a good tool to check if what you wrote really has the effect you want it to have; templates can be tricky, and it's easy to accidentally break one so that the entire article becomes unreadable. Huon (talk) 13:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Huon, for showing me where to get the infotemplate. Now I have a question about references. I am reformatting my references using (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Referencing_for_beginners_with_citation_templates). This format requires the inclusion of the reference's date of publication and the page numbers. However, several of my references come from online articles that do not provide dates and page numbers. What should I do?

Thank you, Dan McD — Preceding unsigned comment added by D102653A (talk • contribs) 15:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I have submitted an article Buttignol, Rudy. This message came up at the beginning of the article and I don't know what it means and what to do. I am afraid of losing all of my hard work. MB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbuttignol (talk • contribs) 17:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, RE: Buttignol, Rudy and the message. Here it is: "Subject of my article is... This sandbox is in the Wikipedia talk namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the template."

What does this mean and what do I do. I am afraid of losing my work. MB M. Buttignol 17:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/H. J. High Construction

It's me again with more questions .... 1. A number of the references in my article cannot be linked back to a website or a publication. For example, one of my references is a proclamation from the city of Orlando—I have a copy of the proclamation but ... how would I submit it to Wikipedia so that you could verify it? I also use a magazine's Book of Lists as a reference, but I can't send you the book. How should I proceed?

2. I want to revise my article using my sandbox. How do I save my revisions on the sandbox, so I can quit the page and then come back later and continue editing?

Thank you,

Dan McD