Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, 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

January 18

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PUBLIC NOTICE - OPPT- One Peoples Public Trust

This public notice , if no other is willing to sacrifice their IP address is groundbreaking. please edit it as of clear addressed examples, I have no experience! I am of no fear, I am free 92.109.107.26 (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, your draft was deleted as (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP). That is, it appeared to the reviewer that your draft was not a proper article, but just a biased and negative expression about a person or group, that is why it was deleted. If you feel this is a misunderstanding, please clarify here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand, the information is to delicate to address to the world and wikipedia does not want the truth on the internet, remember the truth cannot be held against the the will off the people. The G10 ground is unbiased, you can also just state: wikipedia does not want the real truth on the internet or the powers that where, want to reprimand on the organisation. You can block my ip now, I find other ways to reveal the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.109.107.26 (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jay-P

hello i think i have gathered all the info regarding this article. can you please advise me on any additions or ommissions i may have to make to it. AlexanderGee (talk) 07:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

That page is not currently submitted for review. To submit it for review, add {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Srishti Innovative

I see Articles for creation/Srishti Innovative is rejected .I was not using it as advertising our company.I referred few approved company article and wrote a similar kind of article here yet it is rejected . My primary aim is to advise all professionals to follow our non-profit charitable organization kind of thing to help the needy child. Can you pls tell where i went wrong?

Can you please advise me to on this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srishtiics (talk • contribs) 09:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Your aim and our aim seem to diverge, because our aim is to write an encyclopedia. Also, what is a "blood camp"? It sounds rather alarming. For comparison purposes, links to recognised Wikipedia Good Articles about businesses and companies can be found at Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society#Businesses & organizations. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Anscombe

Urgent - overdue review Dear Wikipedia, I am still waiting for review of this article. It's been 11 days now I believe. It took 2 days the first time you reviewed it and I have since made corrections. Please could you let me know if I have done something wrong and when this review will take place?

Best,

Ha0250

Ha0250 (talk) 09:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Ha0250, your article is not currently awaiting review. Note the large pink box at top has a green button saying "Resubmit". You have to push that button to get back in line for a review. We are currently running behind on reviews, so it could take a week or more; but remember, WP:Wikipedia has no deadline, so there is no "urgent" involved.

Before you Resubmit, note your draft needs to properly code its section headings (see WP:Sections) and your sources must be footnoted, not simply listed at bottom. Don't manually number your footnotes, instead use the coding given at WP:Referencing for beginners. Once you've fixed those two things, go ahead and Resubmit. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias How do I put the image of the person in question? Faintsmoke (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Please wait on uploading images until after the article is published. But for your reference, see WP:Images. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Silvius von Kessel

I introduced three external links, it works. BUT the external links relating to German Wikipedia Sites does not work. What am I doing wrongly? Could you help me and perhaps verify that? Thank you so much. Hikulus_07 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hikulus 07 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Hikulus 07, I've fixed it for you, so take a look at how I coded it. Also, other WP articles go under "See also", non-Wikipedia links go under "External links". MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gainor Roberts

Hello, I just submitted my first article and have some questions. The article is titled Gainor Roberts and was created with the Article Wizard.

1. Do references go on a separate page or after the article text? 2. I put references to other Wikipedia articles directly after the word to be a hyperlink and enclosed the reference in parentheses. I didn't list them at the end. OK? How are they turned into hyperlinks? 3. I numbered my outside-Wikipedia references and listed them under references. I inserted the <ref> </ref> html and copied each where it belonged as a footnote in the text. OK? 4. I notice formatting is gone. How do I reinsert? 5. One sentence is now in a grey box. What does this mean?

Thank you. Evelyn4414 (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Evelyn4414 Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gainor Roberts

Hello Evelyn4414, your footnotes weren't appearing because you lacked the {{reflist}} which causes them to list themselves auto-numbered at the end. I fixed that for you, your list of footnotes appeared, and I deleted the redundant version you'd pasted at the end, so that's all good. For the hyperlinks, what we call wikilinks, you don't want to do what you're doing now, simply type double-brackets around key term like so: [[Japan]]. The words are in the gray box because you left an empty space before the start of a line, so I removed the space for you; that's why you don't want to "indent" any paragraph. It's good to get these technical issues sorted out now, so your reviewer will only have to concern themselves with content and sourcing. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PJLink

Hi,

I just try to find some neutral references for my article PJLink. Actually PJLink is originated by Japanese Business Machine manufacturers assoziation. The task of that organization is to bundle the interests of the japanese IT manufacturers and to lobby as well as standardize them. In the Industry JBMIA is a strong and reliable institution.

For communication protocols for projectors JBMIA standardized PJLink.

The source to proof PJLink exists has to be

• signigicant: With the use of PJlink in around 10 Brands with more than 100 Projector models, to my understaning, significance should be given.
• reliable: JBMIA is reliable trustworthy japanese organization and
• independent: With JBMIA being the initiator, independence is not given. How to do?

PJLink is trademark protected, but the Japanese Tradmark office at least in English version of page does not confirm existance of that trademark. How to do?

JBMIA in Japan is comparable to European Computer Manufacturer Assoziation in Europe. For the US I'm sure a similar organization exists, but I would not know their name.

Thank you for your advise. Heinrich — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heinrich.morgen (talk • contribs) 16:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission Marcia Willett

AT a loss as to what to do. Like many writers I use two names - my real name is Rodney Willett but I also write under the name Ron Widdicombe. I used the latter to "join" Wikipedia.

My novelist wife also uses two names. Her own is Marcia Willett (and under that name she has had some twenty-six novels published) and also writes under the name Willa Marsh.

Following comments from various readers, I created a sandbox entitled Marcia WIllett but did not publish it for a long time - mainly through being unhappy that I properly understood how articles should be published. Following further nagging, I published it yesterday.

Since everything about her is what it is, mots of the stuff in the article has appeared on one of our three web sites (ours, her and mine) or on one of my blogs. It is, of course, totally accurate.

The article was almost immediately deleted for copyright reasons.

I tried to use "chat" to dins out more but couldn't make it work - sorry about that - so where do we go from here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron Widdicombe (talk • contribs) 19:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The article was rejected for not being written in an encyclopaedic tone before being deleted for being a straight copy-and-paste of your website. It read a lot like a feature in a magazine, or the blurb from the back of a book, rather than a flat, factual, encyclopaedia article. It also lacked any independent, reliable sources.

Writing articles when you are this close to the subject is not recommended, as it is difficult to write objective, neutral prose.

While we have your assurance that the content is true, I only know you are who you say you are because it is improbable that anyone whould want to impersonate you.

Where do you go from here? I would suggest trying the teahouse who may be able to talk youthrough the finer points of article creation, beyond the limited explaination of the reasons an article is declined that are possible here. Rankersbo (talk) 09:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/oganiru ndigbo ukraine, kyiv

Hello Editors, What can i do to get my article post and published on wikipedia? it concerns a non governmental, non profit organization called Oganiru Ndigbo Ukraine, kyiv. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.120.113.220 (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello 176.120.113.220, did you read the pink box at the top, and the advice posted below it? Before we offer you more advice, we must be sure you've read the advice you've been given so far. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

January 19

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Coalition of Independent Scholars

The submission was denied apparently saying it wasn't notable enough; I'm wondering how, as there is both a link made to NCIS in the Independent Scholar page, and honestly, why wouldn't a national association for independent scholars be notable (especially by similarity to, say, Freelancers Union or other such organizations of independent workers).

If it's a technical issue regarding the writing of the article, I'd like to know what I can do.

Thanks.

KateriDax (talk) 03:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Notability for organisations is usually determined not by what they are, but by the coverage they recieve in independent, reliable sources. Linking to NCIS is OK for verification, but doesn't prove notability. Rankersbo (talk) 16:58, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Beta Phi Pi Fraternity Incorporated

I was referred here because my article got rejected for lack of notable references. My problem is the service organization I wrote about is fairly new and when they provide service to the community, they do it humbly. Therefor press coverage is usually never available to put them in the news paper or any other notable sources. How else can I have my article approved?

Richardalveranga (talk) 08:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Richardalveranga! If the organisation doesn't have WP:Independent coverage, then we can't have an article on it. We can't just base an article on a person or group stating their own claims for significance. If nobody else is writing about BPPFI, then Wikipedia is not going to be the first to do so. Our basic guidelines require:

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spider Project (software)

Hello, I just saw, that an action "Cleaning Wikipedia:Articles for creation submission (AFCH beta)" has been taken on my article by Rankersbo. Question: can I continue to further improve the article or it is better to wait until my submission is accepted/declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ev2geny (talk • contribs) 09:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes you can continue to improve the article while it is waiting to be reviewed. Rankersbo (talk) 09:47, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Anscombe

I've made corrections to the citations and headings but am worried it's not been submitted for review. Please could you check i'm in the queue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ha0250 (talk • contribs) 12:58, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ha0250, no need to "check the queue": your article does not have a "waiting review" yellow template on it, without which it is not in queue. You must press the big green "Resubmit" button on the pink box. Note that the yellow boxes often get inserted at the end of the draft vice top (at first), so after hitting Resubmit and reloading the page, check the top and bottom of your page for a yellow box. The yellow overrides and other template, so as long as you have any yellow box at all, you're in queue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Movable Ink

 Text of article removed

Hi, do you have a question about the articles for creation process? Rankersbo (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Patrick David Shaw

How to I have my submission reviewed and how long does it take? Jonathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonspangler1888 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

There are currently over a thousand article submissions waiting for review. The process usually takes about 2-3 weeks. Please be patient. Your submission will be looked at soon. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Grace Mang

Your suggestion would be very useful regarding How to make this article the best possible contribution to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szezerac (talk • contribs) 18:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow! I'm impressed with the thoroughness of the article and its sources. There aren't many issues that are obvious to me. There are a few minor style issues, but those can be fixed easily. All in all, great work! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Please cite using an inline citation the statement in the "Personal life" section. Information about a living person's personal life is almost always controversial, and per Wikipedia policy an inline citation is required. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I have Accepted the submission, and you can now find it at Grace Mang. There are a couple style issues. Punctuation should precede a citation, and try not to use external links in the body of the article. Thank you for your contributions! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Lucia Daniella Griggi

Just wondering why the submission of Lucia Daniella Griggi was rejected.

Also I want to double-check a permissions email for images to be used on "Wave Loch"

I want to be sure I did it right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebenm (talk • contribs) 23:40, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lucia Daniella Griggi was declined for the reasons given in the pink box at the top of that page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

January 20

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Larry Bourne

[[1]]

I included references to verify all awards and publications of Larry Bourne. However, even after reading the materials available on Wikipedia, I am not clear on what constitutes 'secondary reliable sources.' - A book review written by another party? - Another party writing about the accomplishments of Larry Bourne? Please help me by providing a more basic explanation of what is needed to expand this submission to Wikipedia requirements. I have copied the 2nd review of the article below.

This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people 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. What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

Thank you in advance for any help or comments.

Vivre101 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nexus Interdisciplinary Books

Hi, . Thank you for reviewing my submission Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nexus Interdisciplinary Books. Please tell me why the submission was not accepted. Thank youReginastopper (talk) 08:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The submission was declined because its only content was "This is the Talk Page for Nexus Interdisciplinary Books." Such material is not suitable to be an encyclopedia article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Grzegorz Dorobek case

I'm trying to get my first page in wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Cars_in_Poland_with_a_right-hand_steering_wheel_%28case_C-639/11%29 I had a refusal and made the change requested, now I received a message:

" Your submission at AfC Grzegorz Dorobek case was accepted AFC-Logo.svg Grzegorz Dorobek case, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

   If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
   If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! ~KvnG 02:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC) "

But I don't get the page if I search for "Grzegoorz Dorobek" or "Grzegorz Dorobek case". I don't understand what "accepted start-class" means." Also the link to "the article's talk page" is shown red so I can't see that page.

The page now says: " This article has not been added to any categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (January 2014) " Isn't it in the category "European Court of Justice" through the box top right on the page.

This is an ongoing case coming to judgement and so press/media coverage will increase dramatically across Europe. I hope lots of people will be interested in reading it and lots of people may take the time to add things if there is a basic page in place. I expect to improve and extend it to some extent myself. I'd be grateful for any guidance and I'm happy to try to make any improvements requested. I'd like to avoid waiting a month between my changes and reactions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrdeavelon (talk • contribs) 08:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The article was indeed published and can be read in wikipedia at Grzegorz Dorobek case. You succeeded. It may take a day or so for it to show up in search boxes. It is, however, already searchable through Yahoo and google Rankersbo (talk) 08:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:GrimRob/Gretchen Travis

There is very little biographical information about this author, but she did exist and wrote four books (which have numerous sources). Would it be acceptable to just put the four books on the page and leave everything about the author out? At least it's a starting point which others can add to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrimRob (talk • contribs) 10:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC) GrimRob (talk) 11:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

It is somewhat confusing, but, if two or more of her books have received multiple detailed reviews (or other critical attention) from independent reliable sources, then she is effectively notable as per Wikipedia:NAUTHOR. So yes an article could exist that consists almost entirely of discussion of her work. Your submission should cite the sources that discuss her novels, though, not just list the novels. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Douglas Wilson (businessman)

Hi, I am new to Wiki and need help with my submission, Douglas Wilson/businessman, which was rejected. It is asking me for more credible references however I have a global website references, Make a Wish, Bloomberg, Toronto star and Sony. I'm not sure what else is needed Thumper1001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thumper1001 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Your references aren't specific enough to identify them. So for example if a piece written in the Toronto Star is being used as a source, I would normally expect the reference to include the title of the piece, the name of the journalist that wrote the piece, the page number it appeared on, and the date of publication. One or two of these items might be missing, but not all of them. It would also be useful for the reference to be an inline citation so that the reviewer can easily see which facts in the submission are supported by that particular reference. You can read more about how to format references at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.

Secondly, I don't think www.prlog.org is a reliable source for anything (it's a free press release distribution service). And if Wilson is a Board member of Make a Wish Canada, then Make a Wish Canada is not an independent source regarding him, and thus not useful in proving his notability. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hi Developers,

Would you please tell me how I can go for the online chat? I cannot type and ask questions even when the developers are offering me help on live chat.

Thanks, Rabin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabindahal (talk • contribs) 17:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lloyd Northover (design consultancy)

The proposed article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lloyd Northover (design consultancy) has not been accepted. It was deleted for reasons of copyright (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement). Much of the content was taken from an existing Wikipedia article created in 2011. All content on Wikipedia is freely copyable and reusable anywhere on the site - it is common to find paragraphs or sections used across multiple pages. Such cross-referencing is part of the point of Wikipedia. The existing article and the proposed one contain information generated by me and do not contain any copyrighted material. Lloyd Northover was a significant and influential international design consultancy of interest to the global academic and professional design communities. It deserves a place on Wikipedia. Foggywells Foggywells (talk) 22:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Santa Cecilia Orchestra

Hi,

I am checking to confirm that my recent article submission has is okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richie Matthews (talk • contribs) 20:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles Mayrs

Dear Sir/Madam:

Thank you for considering our recent application for a Wikipedia page for Mr. Charlie Mayrs of West Vancouver, British Columbia. As you may have guessed, it was our first time attempting to establish such a page, and despite reading your helpful instructions beforehand, it appears we unfortunately fell a bit short of satisfying your requirements regarding proof of Mayrs’s credentials.

Although much of it is in printed form and predates the much easier internet forms of referencing, we have outlined below the considerable evidence we have subsequently assembled to confirm Mr.Mayrs’s accomplishments and standing within the community. We would greatly appreciate it if you would advise us as to how we may best employ it to satisfy your needs.

Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

Best regards,

Alan Davidson (acting on behalf of Mr.Mayrs)

Advertising & Public Relations Mr.Mayrs was a successful and leading member of the Vancouver & West Coast advertising community for many decades, and as such was a “go-to” person for journalists hoping to understand and explain industry trends. As proof of this high-profile aspect of Mr. Mayrs’s career, we can supply scans of original NSP articles and references (Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province, North Shore News) and magazines such as Marketing, Equity, Business in Vancouver and Strategy) — all with articles on/quotations from CM. If desired, we can also supply samples of Mr.Mayrs award-winning creative advertising design work from his days at Dome Advertising and FCB.

Painting/Fine Art Mr.Mayrs is a prolific and accomplished painter, and over the years has had many exhibitions on the West Coast as well as in Hawaii, where he has a second home.

On this front, we are happy to supply scanned proof of original articles in magazines such as “Arts Alive”, Air Canada “Enroute”, a CM biographical listing in the reference book “Artists of British Columbia” as well as scanned proof of CM exhibitions in Vancouver (Vancouver Art Gallery) and West Coast galleries such as Woodworks, Diane Farris Gallery and Seymour Art Gallery (“Preview of the Visual Arts” and “Boulevard” arts magazines,“Plus” magazine, Vancouver Sun newspaper, North Shore News, The Moncton News, Vancouver Art Gallery catalogue). There is also proof of an 2000 exhibition on the Hawaiian island of Maui. (”Maui Art” magazine). Of course, if desired, we can also provide scanned samples of Mr. Mayrs’s paintings.

Limited Edition Books (Design, Photography, Illustration) Mr.Mayrs has conceived and published a significant number of limited edition books about the people and landscape of Canada and British Columbia. He writes and designs each one, augmenting his unique poetry and prose with his own photography, painted imagery, and graphic illustrations. They are subsequently printed using the laborious but beautiful letterpress technique, often with hand-crafted covers and special handmade papers. Copies currently reside in the reference libraries of educational institutions across Canada such as the University of British Columbia.

We can supply high resolution scans of the books themselves (or you may visit www.charlesmayrs.com to view them in their entirety), first place awards from the likes of the Alcuin Society of Canada, and feature articles in the society’s magazine “Amphora” as well as a references to jury selection in the Biennial International Miniature Print Exhibition. There are also a reference available to an earlier CM award for graphic design and personal profile in “Typography 60”, of which we have scans.

Editorial Cartoon Illustration For a number of years, Mr.Mayrs created political and social commentary cartoons for the editorial pages of the North Shore Outlook newspaper. He called them “Glimmericks”, and we are happy to supply multiple scans of these pages featuring his work as well as Letters to the Editor pages in which readers bemoan his eventual retirement from that job.

Finally, Mr. Mayrs biography may be found in two editions of the Canadian “Who's Who” reference book. (1988 & 2010). If desired, we are happy to supply high rez scans of same for your consideration.

Can you please advise as to how best to proceed? Thanks!

Enkephalon (talk) 21:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Can you back all of the above up with third-party sources that have editorial oversight and no ties to Mr. Mayrs in a neutral fashion that doesn't only suit your client's interests? —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 23:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Photron

Hello, The article I wrote (Photron), was declined by 78.26. I wrote this article not as an advertisement but as an informative article, exactly like the one under Vision Research Phantom concerning high speed cameras. When I say exactly, I mean I used the Vision Research Phantom wiki-page as a guideline/template. It surprises me that my article is consider advertising when the Vision Research Phantom article has the same type of content. I have tried again to make neutral, rewriting and removing all that I could possibly see that could be construed at advertising. This article is on Photron as a company, just like hundreds that are on Wikipedia. I want to make sure it complies to what is needed just like the article Vision Research Phantom had complied. I wanted to ask (78.26) what is being cited as advertising in the article since the referenced provided in the decline (wiki articles) which I had read before and again don't seem to apply to the content in my article. To contact(78.26), do I open a new subject on (78.26) talk page?

Any help would be appreciated. Best, HighSpeedWizzard — Preceding unsigned comment added by HighSpeedWizzard (talk • contribs) 22:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Vision Research Phantom is not recognised as a quality article by Wikipedia, so there are no guarantees about its suitability as a guideline or template for submitting new articles. For links to recognised Good Articles about companies, see Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society#Businesses & organizations.

Yes, opening a new subject on their talk page would be the best way to contact them. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:07, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rani Dhavan Shankardass

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Martinjonson Hello! I have previously written an article on the global slavery expert Siddharth Kara and have just created an article on another related activist in bonded labor and prison reform, Rani Dhavan Shankardass. Please could I trouble someone to give me some feedback on the article? Thanks so much! Martinjonson (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

January 21

was my JulietteSpeaks article denied? I thought I had to wait three weeks to get a response??

was my JulietteSpeaks article denied? I thought I had to wait three weeks to get a response?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAAsources (talk • contribs) 00:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Please provide a link to the draft article you submitted. According to the record of your activity posting this question is the only thing you have ever done on the English Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Why was my Minecraft Multiplayer thing declined — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bford123 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Minecraft Multiplayer was declined because it had no sources.

In addition, there already exists the Wikipedia article Minecraft, which would be the correct place to add further information - if you have sources for the information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:59, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Father of naval medicine

i posted one article titled Father of naval medicine,ca n i know how many days it will take to get approval/rejection and how could i know whether it is approved or rejected.--Sukendhar singamshetty (talk) 05:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

First of all, that page is not submitted for review.

Second, the article James Lind already exists, so if you have any additional sourced information you should add it there, not in a new article. Using inline citations would be best; see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners to see how to add these. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ninoslav Marina

Hello,

Can anyone help me figure out why the article for Ninoslav Marina is declined and how can I fix it so it can be published?

Thanks in advance, Misko — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mihajlovmisko (talk • contribs) 08:25, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

It was declined because it had no references. To see how to add references, click the links provided in the pink box on the page itself. You may also find Wikipedia:ACADEMIC, the notability guideline for academic people, to be useful. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spider Project (software)

Hello, I seem not to be able to make an inter-language link to the similar already existing article on the other language [2]. How do I do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ev2geny (talk • contribs) 08:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alex Martinez, Graffiti Artist

Title: Alex Martinez, Graffiti Artist

I have edited the article but I don't think it's submitted for review. Why?

It's a straight bio of a famous artist who is missing from Wiki because he has been intentionally anonymous up to now.

Granted, my original edit was wacky with a zillion links but that's fixed. Where did I go wrong?

Thanks

Bill

Graffitinucular (talk) 09:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

The London Evening Standard article is a useable source. But you have only that one source that's both independent and reliable, so you need more. You also can't describe a living person as being wanted by the police unless you can support that fact with an inline citation to a reliable source which says so. Plus, commentary like "Some types of crime do pay, eventually!" is not suitable for an encyclopedia article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Graffitinucular, answering here to keep all the answers in one place:

• Regarding images, I'm not an expert but my understanding is murals/grafitti would be presumed to be Martinez's copyrighted works unless he has specifically released them as Public Domain. Like if he literally sharpies "RELEASED UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 1.4" at the bottom. ;) But otherwise we can't just assume his works to be freely usable, since taking a photo of a piece of artwork does not constitute creating a new "piece of work" owned by you. For buildings/structures in the US, Wikipedia:Freedom of panorama lets you photograph them as your "own work", but not statues, murals, or other visual arts. So I'm not clear on any way to legally to it except having Martinez himself contact the Wikimedia Foundation to file an WP:OTRS slip verifying that he is Martinez and releases Mural #47 to the Public Domain, unlimited for any and all purposes.
  • You can also check Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright if you want to get a better feel for Image rules.
• Regarding your current draft, you only have one decent reference. Please read WP:Notability (artists) which explains what kind of neutral, objective, independent coverage of him we need from news media and/or academia. Basically, we need to see things written about him by uninvolved professionals interested in his work. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I have a Penthouse Magazine verifiable link plus Greek Newspaper articles. Regarding Alex's book, can I put an Amazon link on Wiki? Probably not eh?

Will have to get my head around this stuff, read it a few times.

Thanks to all

Bill Graffitinucular (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bill. You are correct, Amazon links for products are almost never suitable for Wikipedia articles. That is mainly because Amazon has an interest in selling the product, and thus is not an independent source - no use for proving notability. In addition, Amazon customer reviews and the like are what we call "user generated content" - which is not considered reliable. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:36, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/November Music

Dear,

I'm struggeling with the reliable sources/references in my article. I've looked at other musicfestivals and they only have an external link to their website, just as I used. And those that have references, refer to their own website. What to do?

Thanks in advance,

best,

Koen Graat KGraat (talk) 11:07, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I always recommend looking at Wikipedia Good Articles as examples of what to do, rather than just looking at any article that happens to be in the same subject area. In this case, there are several music festivals that are Wikipedia Good Articles, including Glastonbury Festival. That and the rather less well-known (and now bankrupt) Ashton Court Festival article make use of a variety of sources including local newspapers, major online news websites such as the BBC, and so on. It is acceptable for sources to be either online or offline, and in either Dutch or English. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

How to add a title to an article ?

 Done Hi there

I'm creating my first article on Wikipedia, but I don't manage to give it a title. Currently the article title is Avitawil/Sandbox. How can I change that? Please help me. I've tried to look at the wikipedia FAQ, but I haven't found an answer to my question. Thanks in advance.

Best regards, Avi Tawil — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avitawil (talk • contribs) 11:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

There is no need to worry about the article title at present; the reviewer will Wikipedia:MOVE it to the appropriate title if it is accepted. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ՄԵԼԳՈՆԵԱՆ ԿՐԹԱԿԱՆ ՀԱՍՏԱՏՈՒԹԻՒՆ

Hello,Here is my Question. why my artice was not accepted? Thank you. Raffi Ipdjian Raffiipdjian (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Raffiipdjian/sandbox was rejected because it is not written in English and therefore not suitable for the English Wikipedia. The Armenian Wikipedia may be more suitable. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Artis

Hello

I tried to create this 'Artis' article two weeks ago, but it hasn't been reviewed, or at least I'm unaware of the edits it need! Let me know what I should do. HaKulturist (talk) 18:46, 21 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HaKulturist (talk • contribs) 18:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

That article isn't currently submitted for review. You need to place the text {{subst:submit}} on it. Rankersbo (talk) 19:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

thanks!  Fixed Now that I have the link I've saved it to find the page, but how did you look for it in the first place and see it wasn't in the reviews? HaKulturist (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Well it is in your edit history, and in the header for this section.Rankersbo (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

You can tell if it's in the queue or not, by seeing if it has a yellow "Waiting" box. If it has that anywhere on the page, you're in the queue. If not, you're not. Sometimes there are multiple templates on the page due to a pile-up of coding, but the Yellow takes precedence, even if it appears at the bottom of the page. Any Yellow = in queue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Salted Challenge Response Authentication Mechanism

Hello, my rejection included that I need to reference the notability of SCRAM. Now I don't know whether it is notable for Wikipedia or not. Why isn't it sufficient that it is an IETF standard?

As secondary sources, I have found those on the Web: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

XMPP applications supporting SCRAM: [11] [12] (According to [13], SCRAM is mandatory in XMPP)

I can't tell which of those have sufficient coverage to be reliable sources by Wikipedia definition.

I would like to make, as requested, the article less technical. But when it is not notable I don't want to invest more time. So my question is: Is SCRAM notable at all?

Thank you. Muelleum (talk) 22:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Those sources do appear to be independent so yes please use them in the article. With the inclusion of these sources Notability would indeed be satisfied. You can also ask WP:WikiProject Computing for assistance, the editors there are familiar with writing articles in this subject area so they can give you more specific advice. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:00, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

January 22

Review of Lynda Elimon/Naight

Thank you Matthew Vanitas for being kind about the disinclusion of the "Lynda Elimon" bio note. I can learn what makes a good submission from this site and try writing about a singer with a bigger following. naightNaight (talk) 03:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Maxwell_Chase

Re: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Maxwell_Chase Submission declined on 17 December 2013 by SarahStierch (talk). 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. You are encouraged to make improvements by clicking on the "Edit" tab at the top of this page. If you require extra help, ask a question at the Articles for creation help desk. You may also like to try the live help chat with experienced editors. Find sources: "Maxwell Chase" – books · scholar · JSTOR · free images.Declined by SarahStierch 35 days ago. Last edited by SarahStierch 35 days ago. Reviewer: Inform author.

Hi, We are not very familiar with how this works but would like to inquire as to why the page created for Maxwell Chase was declined. All info on the page is accurate and verifiable on IMDb http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4098408 Maxwell Chase at the Internet Movie Database his personal website http://www.MaxwellChase.org Official Website and links for articles provided. If there is something missing in order to bring the page to date for publication please let us know so it can be rectified. We would never put his career at risk by listing false or misleading information. Thank you for your assistance, Lisa & Maxwell Chase MaxwellChase (talk) 07:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

IMDB is not considered a reliable source, and Maxwell's own website is not considered an independent source (therefore does nothing to help prove his notability). Suitable sources to prove his notability would be things like newspaper reviews or magazine articles that discuss his acting in depth. You may also find Wikipedia:NACTOR, the notability guidelines for actors, to be useful. Finally, you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and also please note that Wikipedia does not permit sharing of accounts; one account per person please. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/W.E Twentyman

Hello

My proposed wiki page was rejected. Can you please offer some guidance as to why?

Thank you

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonlitdribbler (talk • contribs) 08:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/W.E Twentyman was declined for the reasons given in and below the pink box on that page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stephen_Palmer_(author)

Hi,

I've had a couple of rejections for a new article on UK science-fiction author Stephen Palmer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Stephen_Palmer_(author)

Both times he's been rejected on grounds of notability.

Any feedback on what we could do to get this accepted would be very much appreciated!

A little background:

Palmer has had seven novels published: two by the big commercial imprint Orbit, one by PS Publishing (a leading independent publisher that has won numerous awards, published original works by the likes of Stephen King, etc), and others by various publishers, including Wildside in the US. My article cites, among others, Palmer's entry in the SF Encyclopedia (published commercially by Gollancz in the UK, and pretty much a standard benchmark in the genre - an author with an entry in the Encyclopedia is, in the genre's terms, most definitely notable).

My own background: I'm an occasional updater of Wikipedia articles. I've been established in science-fiction publishing for the last 25 years in various writing and editorial roles, with more than 20 books to my name (most recently the Philip K Dick Award-shortlisted novel Harmony, and the academic study of SF published by Palgrave Macmillan, Strange Divisions and Alien Territories). I only mention these to establish my credentials, and to support my argument that I can recognize a notable SF author when I see one!

The article's background: Palmer asked me last year how I'd got my own Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Brooke); rather than simply advise him, I was so surprised that an author of his standing didn't already have an entry I went off and wrote it myself.

Hope this helps, and that we can get a Stephen Palmer (author) page established!

Keith Brooke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.245.61.26 (talk) 09:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Keith. Try adding references to a few reviews of his books then resubmitting. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/_Vinod_Shekhar

I am fairl new to wikipedia however i would require help on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/_Vinod_Shekhar the article did not get approved because of citations . Please advice or help. Thank you Brendanvaz1984 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brendanvaz1984 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ljuskrona

I did not pass the review after attempting to correct the first critique. This is my first attempt to submit information. Any direction is appreciated. Giant Green Snake (talk) 15:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I have accepted this article submission and it is now at Ljuskrona.

Please review Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and then attempt to fix the citations/references, which are currently all wrong. (You should not have external links in the body of the article text.) If you manage to fix these, please feel free to remove the {{copyedit}} template, as it will then no longer be required. There are a couple of other templates on the article noting things that could be improved. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ljuskrona]

I did not pass the review after attempting to correct the first critique. The validity seems to be in question. The link to the Kansas Historical Society is independent and reliable. The link to the Clarion is independent and still published under another title, "Folk Art" published by the Museum of American Folk Art. This is my first attempt to submit information. Any direction is appreciated. Giant Green Snake (talk) 15:30, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Please see my reply above. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Battle of Smithfield

Regarding the submission for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Battle of Smithfield , can you tell me why it was rejected? Thanks. Quino222 (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Quino222, did you read the detailed comments in the pink box at the top of your draft? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hi,

Would you please let me know why my article got rejected? Thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogicNI (talk • contribs) 21:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/LogicNI was declined for the reasons given in the pink box at the top of that page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Connie Corleone

I'm slightly lost. I am currently trying to make a page for Connie Corleone, which, for some reason, in 2014, does not exist on the English Wikipedia. Am I doing it right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanHakimi (talk • contribs) 23:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dan. Here are a few things to change.

• References should go in the main body text of the article, directly after the statements that they support; not at the end of the article. Once you have placed them in the main body text of the article, they will be displayed at the end of the article when the page is viewed.
• IMDB is not considered a reliable source so is not useful in proving notability of the character.
• Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) has some guidance on whether a fictional character is notable, and also some links to how to write about fictional characters.
• An article about a fictional character should not solely focus on plot elements, but instead should give equal weight to what reliable sources (e.g. movie reviews, magazine articles, any academic studies) have said about the significance of the character, its public image and reception, the intentions of its creator, and so on.
• If citing a book as a source, it's best to include page numbers.

Hope this helps. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leneka Rhoden

Leneka Rhoden,born May 21, 1997, is a fashion model at Saint International Model Agency who enjoys inspiring others. She is enthusiastic, talented, open-minded, eloquent and intellectual. She aspires to be a Motivational Speaker, Fashion Designer and Lecturer in Anatomy, Physiology and genetics. She currently attends one of the top all girl high schools in Kingston, Jamaica. In the year 2010, she was given the grand opportunity to be signed to Saint International Model Agency (one of the top model agencies in the Caribbean), from there,her life transformed. She started to blossom into a more extroverted young lady being more dedicated and determined to make her permanent mark in the fashion industry. In addition to this she started fashion designing in 2012. For all her designed pieces she has been highly commended for her fashionable unique creative style. She has much more to accomplish, and with her awesome personality, unique style, creative mind, love for fashion and determination she indeed will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.27.150.27 (talk) 23:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes. After she has done so, it may be the case that she is notable enough for there to be an article about her in Wikipedia; and at that point, someone unconnected with her may write one. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Seishijuku/sandbox

I am attempting to write an article of historical significance to the evolution of karate. My article was declined due to lack of outside references. We are searching for newspaper articles and other outside independently verifiable sources. I don't know which statements I need outside references for (or which I need to remove). Would it be possible to learn which sentences are causing my article to be rejected?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

24.59.184.196 (talk) 23:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Why not reference all of the content? There is often no need to add unreferenced information to Wikipedia - if the information cannot be referenced then where did it come from?

Certainly sentences such as "He is one of the original Kyokushinkai U.S.A. students, certified by Mastutatsu Oyama of Japan, who trained at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, under Tadashi Nakamura" would need sources.

Much of the submission also seems rather promotional. For example fact-free material like "Over many years Grandmaster Lane considered the needs of his students" and "supported, inspired and influenced intellectual, academic, success, as well as physical performance, for his students" and "introduced Seishi karate to provide effective training experiences for his students". Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

January 23

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mario Despoja

I don't know if the reviewer who rejected my submission on Mario Despoja Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mario Despojaactually read through the two references. If he had, he would have seen that all the material which followed my insertion of footnotes 1 and 2 into the text was contained in the articles already referenced.

My approach would have been fine in an academic journal, I believe. How does Wikipedia handle a situation like this?Tundern (talk) 01:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Tundern, since Despoja is a WP:Living person we have an ethical (and procedural) obligation to ensure that all stated facts about him are sourceable. If you've already footnoted a source, and you use it later in the article, just footnote it again. There's a way to tidy it up later, but in the meantime it's fine to footnote the same source several times. Do note though, we always want to see a body of coverage on a biography, so if you can add some more citations about him, maybe go on GoogleBooks and find a cite to a published book for additional contrast, that helps show the reader that a variety of works agree on the basic facts of his life. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Tisch

I'm kind of new to Wikipedia. Recently, an article I recently wrote was declined with the reason:

"This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject."

I don't really understand what this means. I want to make it a good article but I don't know how to fix it. Could somebody please give me a little more direction as to how I can improve the article? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cazer78 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

If you look at the decline reason again you will see that the key terms and phrases are blue links - open those links and you will find pages containing explanations and guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Anscombe

Please can you let me know if my submission is now under review. I've made amends and yet it's not clear on my page. There is a yellow box. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ha0250 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes that submission is awaiting review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:46, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/mp3 to wmv files conversion

Sir, I have published the above titled article. But got to know it was rejected. I just want to know what`s wrong in my article. Please reply asap. Tezzsurya (talk) 10:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Tezzsurya

It was declined for the reasons given in and below the pink box on the page itself. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Malik Muhammad Jahangir

Copy-paste of full article removed

Upon his outstanding business leadership, The Republic of Reunion of Myanmar, appointed him to be the Honorary Consul General of Myanmar in Pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitepearl1 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Whitepearl1, this is place to ask questions, not post drafts. Do you have an actual question for us? If you want to start a draft, use WP:Article Wizard. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:OuthouseUK/sandbox

Hi,

I would really appreciate some advice with regards to my Wikipedia entry. Could you please give some clarity as to have I achieve Notability, and provide a couple of examples? I have spent a few hours on the chat room and it seems that the page I have created is lacking in non promotional references, however looking at other pages, as an example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Goodwin_(escapologist) , I cannot understand why this has been accepted yet the page I have created has not been accepted.

Your help and guidance would be very much appreciated.

Kindest regards, Rebecca Outhouse-UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by OuthouseUK (talk • contribs) 17:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rebecca. The article on Goodwin is not a recognised Wikipedia Good Article or Featured Article so it's probably not a good example for comparison. You can find the list of recognised Good Articles about comparable people at Wikipedia:Good articles/Media and drama#Actors, models, performers and celebrities and Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society#Psychology and psychologists. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:37, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review ofWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Latin Zone Magazine

I wrote this article and can't find the reasons why it was not accepted. Can someone explain? Here's the link Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Latin Zone Magazine Quintrala92 19:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Quintrala92. Did you read the pink box? Part of the big issues is you haven't demonstrated WP:Notability, summed up at WP:42 as:

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

Accordingly, just linking to the subject itself (the magazine) does not meet these requirements. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

January 24

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Niall Sheehy (actor)

Why was my submission declined again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karin Phan (talk • contribs) 12:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Aidan O'Rourke (Musician)

Thanks for sharing your link after my submission was declined. I wonder if you could share your thoughts on exactly why it was declined.

My submission was originally declined before Christmas because I had used the same copy from the musician's website and I understand this was wrong. This time I went to a lot of trouble to highlight why it was I think this artist should have a listing on Wikipedia. However, I am told Aidan O'Rourke is not a notable musician. Here are my thoughts on this...

• Aidan O'Rourke is in the band Lau with Kris Drever. Lau and Drever both have entries on Wikipedia. How can these be notable and not O'Rourke?
• Lau have won four BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards in five years and are nominated for a fifth this year. Is this not notable enough?
• O'Rourke won Instrumentalist of the year at the Scottish Traditional Music Awards in 2006
• He has released three acclaimed solo albums
• He has toured from the UK to Australia and Japan with Lau, Kan and as a solo artist
• He is an in-demand teacher of the fiddle

I believe all of this is covered in the entry I submitted and does make him a notable artist. If you can offer any ideas how I can can my entry approved I'd be very grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplymarvellous (talk • contribs) 13:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

This may seem a little pedantic and weasilish but the decline reason given was: "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability". I mean it's deliberately broad because notability is a judgement call and assessors are human. What it says is that notability has not been proved by referencing. The golden rule is "Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The two links given are neither reliable sources that are independent of the subject. You can't just claim he is notable and only give his website and the website of his associates as proof, you need to show it with links to reliable sources talking about him and his achievements.

In short, if Aidan is as acclaimed as you claim, please can we have some coverage showing it? Rankersbo (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

References for a company

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tactical_Air_Support,_Inc._(TacAir)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tactical Air Support, Inc. (TacAir)

Are these references unacceptable because they link to TacAir's website, or is it because they are news articles?

How many references are preferred for this to be approved?

How can one prove notability of a corporation? What additional sources can you suggest, please? We have news blurbs but they are written by ex-military gentlemen associated with the company in question.

Ostglobalsolutions (talk) 16:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

The notability requirements for companies are detailed at WP:COMPANY. Note that for an article to be alloqwed to stay, it must follow the Golden Rule. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

The way the references are presented may be causing confusion. The NNBW piece was presumably first published in the NNBW, and is merely archived on TacAir's own website. So, it would be better to cite the original publication. That way it's clear to the reviewer what is being cited. I'm assuming the other two references currently provided are similar. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Diamond Logistics

[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Diamond Logistics]]

Is this ever likely to leave 'non-notable' status? I can find plenty of sources, but again they will be of a similar type of source, more franchise websites.

Thebrighcli (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ApplyKit

Where can I get feedback on my article to make sure I’m abiding by Wiki standards and advice on making the content more presentable/compelling?

BrandonPindulic (talk) 19:37, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Brandon