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

June 1

Review of Draft:Eliot Lewis (musician)Righttrack

I need help understanding what is an acceptable source for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Righttrack. According to one of your volunteers, an article in which a journalist or blogger interviewed Mr. Lewis is fine, but video of a TV interview in which a journalist asks him questions and he answers is not. The volunteer said that Mr. Lewis' answers have to be "substantially rewritten" before they can be used as a source. To me, as a former journalist, that seems odd. Also, I was told that to be a source, an article *must* be online. That may be a problem, since not all papers have all their entire article base online.

Thank you for your help!

Righttrack (talk) 00:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Who told you that sources must be online? Where did they tell you this? Whoever they are, they are 100% wrong.

As for the TV interview, one doesn't cite a piece of video footage that happens to be online somewhere; one cites the publication, i.e. the TV programme that it aired on.

Interviews are not great for proving notability, because they are mainly sources for what the person claims about themselves. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Rpenafiel/sandbox

Hi, I was wondering if my article was accepted or declined because it stays on my sandbox User:Rpenafiel and I have not received any other notes from editor. It does show on my "contribution" list but I'm not sure whether my content was accepted and published nor if rejected and needs further editing to be done to get accepted as Wiki content. Thank you very much.Rpenafiel (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

You were informed on your talk page that the submission had been declined. You reacted by removing the information about the reasons for it being declined, in this edit. Feel free to further improve the submission in accordance with the advice given. You can resubmit it by putting {{subst:submit}} on the submission page. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

A little more exactly, it was declined for being essentially a press release for a company with no references to support its notability , and both problems must be addressed; there is no point in resubmitting until you have done so. A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online. Without them, it will not be possible to write an acceptable article. Then, a Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release. Don't include material that would better belong in an advertisement or a web page, such as a detailed list of products or the personal motivation of the principals. Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients/purchasers/students/supporters/donors--that sort of content is considered promotional. DGG ( talk ) 17:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

A "thought trick" that I use when writing about companies and other organizations is to ask myself "Will anybody care about this 200 years from now, when the organization no longer exists and everyone with personal memories of it are long dead?" If the answer is a clear "no", it's probably not worth including. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sean Erlston

The article has been declined but there is no explanation why. Wikipedia has an article/page about wedding photographers which can only have names listed if an article page exists about that photographer, which is why I made the page submission which has been rejected.How do you make a page, which is a prerequisite, without it being rejected?Sean Erlston (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia only needs biographical articles about people that are notable - see WP:GNG. Sadly, you are not yet notable by that standard. Reasons for an article being declined are almost always found on the page submitted. In this case that seems not to be accessible to you or to me - perhaps the submitted page was too overtly promotional (like spam) or perhaps it was a copyright violation by copying from an external website? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Sexton

Resolved

Hi there--just wanted to stop by and ask if there might be anything holding up review of this entry. I know the article review process is backlogged.

I originally started working on this article in Feb., have worked with a few volunteer Wiki editors, and want to make sure there's nothing missing before it gets to a reviewer. Thanks!

Theenglishmaven (talk) 15:14, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Theenglishmaven (talk) - I reviewed the article - made a few minor changes and added a ref to verify the biographical information in the article. I know it's been a while - thanks for your patience! Julie JSFarman (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Waterloo Busker Carnival

I believe this article is ready for publication. It is not "fictional"....not sure where that came from...and while the help is appreciated.....and I have done as asked....even to point out that the Waterloo Chronicle is a weekly newspaper as well as being on-line (like the majority of newspapers today). It's time to approve this and get it on Wikipedia. Thank you!DivaWord (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

It's been submitted for another review. Rankersbo (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Reviewed and accepted - it is now at Waterloo Busker Carnival. Congratulations! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2

Review of Draft:John Sutton Lutz

Hello. I've completed my draft of [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/JohnSuttonLutz] and am not sure how to activate it? Could you please advise. I'm clearly doing something incorrectly. KeithKeith Thor Carlson (talk) 00:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

 DoneYou hadn't finished the <ref> with a </ref>, so nothing after the broken reference worked, including your many attempts to submit. It's been fixed now. Rankersbo (talk) 10:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Yun Mu Kwan (karate)

I submitted an article called Yun Mu Kwan the other day from my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Swmirsky/sandbox and received a message as follows:

"This sandbox is in the Draft namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the template."

I don't understand what it is telling me to do. Can someone assist? Thanks.

Swmirsky (talk) 03:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC) swmirsky

Done. You just need to remove the template at the top of the draft. JSFarman (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Joe

In relation to the Article, I am the trademark holder and designer of Hottorque. Are you refering to the copright material as in from it being from Business Wire.

The stated comments in the business wire article are in true fact, as our company being the first to create a social media application with a Iphone App integration for the Automotive industry also we were the first Australian Tech Company to be a sponsor in a NASCAR sprintcup event.

So what do you suggest we create our own Article based on all the facts rather than the Business wire article

Also I would like to know how do we get this Article to main stream wiki?

Regards Laz Till CEO Hottorque.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by HtorqueMarketing (talk • contribs) 05:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the truth of the material was questioned. You can't use copyright material on wikipedia, even if you wrote it yourself. You must either compose new wording or formally and legally licence the material to wikipedia so the material can be reproduced and altered as any editor and reader sees fit. It's usually better to go down the re-write route as material composed for press releases tend to be too promotionally worded to work as an encyclopaedia article. Rankersbo (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Question

under what accounting entry is the battery use for wall clock — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.15.57 (talk) 06:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This help desk is only for editors seeking advice on their draft articles. For general questions, please go to Wikipedia:Reference desk. Voceditenore (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Liam.bertuzzi/sandbox

explain why my article was accepted please...Liam.bertuzzi (talk) 07:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Liam.bertuzzi, I assume you mean not accepted. The decline notice at the top of your draft explains the reason quite clearly, and given the content of your draft, I'm pretty sure you know perfectly well why it was declined. Voceditenore (talk) 10:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Incrediblehappenings01/sandbox

please why was my article decline? please get back to me.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Incrediblehappenings01 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Incrediblehappenings01, the decline notice and comment at the top of your draft explains why it was declined. Please read them and the linked pages you were given there. Voceditenore (talk) 10:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Directorate of Cooperation of Security and Defence

Hello everyone,

I've submitted an article 1 month ago, which still unvalidate... You can find it here (in the talk page) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Directorate_of_Cooperation_of_Security_and_Defence

Thanks in advance for any help,

--MelDCSD (talk) 13:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Please be assured that someone will review it. The delay is not on purpose, you know. Everyone who reviews articles does so when they can and when they want, and volunteers to do so. Hurrying volunteers is often counter-productive. Sometimes one wishes to review an article but finds one hasn't the expertise in the relevant area, so one passes on. Time is immaterial to Wikipedia, though. An article goes live when it is ready. No-one ever dies because of the lack of an article. Fiddle Faddle 17:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I see that it is a very close translation of the French WP article . Obviously, this is a good way to start an article here about a French organisation, but our practice differ somewhat from the practices there. I will review the article in a few hours, and tell you about the needed changes. (You are in my o[pinion very right to complain about the delay; it is the fault of our having insufficient good reviewers, and we must not be complacent about it) DGG ( talk ) 17:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses, I just wanted to be sure my draft was still in the actuality, take all the time you need to valid it dear volunteer, I wait your advices for the needed changes :)--MelDCSD (talk) 06:51, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Deanpowers/sandbox

Hello, I submitted an article on the "Quick Zope CMS"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deanpowers/sandbox

It was rejected for copyright violations because the content was taken from:

https://github.com/Zojax/QuickZopeCMS.

However, I was the author of the Github content since I am the CEO of Zojax (http://www.zojax.com).

Please tell me how to get this article approved.

Regards,

Dean Powers CEO, Zojax Group LLC

Deanpowers (talk) 14:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Deanpowers, I'm afraid it doesn't matter if you are the author or not. It was previously published on a page clearly marked © 2014 GitHub, Inc. Likewise the pages at zojax.com are marked © 2012 Zojax Group, LLC. If you own the copyright and want to donate the material for use of Wikipedia, the instructions are WP:Donating copyright material—you must follow them to the letter. However, it would be a complete waste of your time. Even if the text were copyright free, the draft is unacceptable on multiple levels as a blatant advertisement, e.g.

• QuickZopeCMS is a good choice for medium to large projects, providing an intuitive interface for managing the following types of content
• QuickZopeCMS is a powerful and flexible python web content management system and framework.
• It's built on Zope technologies to be very robust and flexible with pluggability in mind
• Contact: info@zojax.com

Before continuing any further with this, I strongly suggest you read WP:NOTADVERTISING, Wikipedia:Golden Rule, and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Voceditenore (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carlos Dews

Hello. I'm looking for help with my Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carlos Dews article. I have discussed it with the reviewer who declined it (Fiddle Faddle) and he sent me here. Our discussion is at User_talk:Timtrent#Carlos Dews. I need more help understanding why the listing of chapters/articles that show Dews's Carson McCullers expertise is too much. I have looked at the links Fiddle Faddle suggested as indices, and I don't see that they would showcase the McCullers well. Where else can I look for a listing without having everything Dews wrote show up?

As requested, to help with clarity, I will start reworking the page to remove the inlines in the article and the references. While waiting (nearly six weeks) for a review of the article, I kept clicking "Edit" to add more and more to 'improve' the article. I guess I went way overboard.

Any help is appreciated -- thank you! Oldbeeg (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Please never be concerned about doing too much. Doing too much is great! Doing too little, that is not so good. I'm glad you came here. Opinions other than mine are always useful. I may be incorrect, it has happened before, and I learn from that each time. We're doing something about the 6 week queue. There is currently a backlog clearance drive on. That is how we met. Fiddle Faddle 16:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The hours spent on research "doing too much" is not so great when that's apparently what got my article declined. I'm sure there're notability references in there, they're apparently hidden amongst the excess. <sad face> I need to figure out how much is excess. Oldbeeg (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The important thing is to ensure that you retain the references that have significant coverage about Dews, independent of him and in reliable sources. Then what you do is to consider the facts you assert in the article and make sure each of them is so referenced. Ignore the list of work for the present. It is the last thing you need to attend to. Read my comment in detail at the head of the article.

Please may we have other eyes on this? I have reviewed it as well as I am able, but, if I am not helping our new friend it needs others to look and offer help, too. Fiddle Faddle 23:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

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

hello please why does my recent submission has been declined?Raissa Damergi (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

thank you, Regards, Raissa

@Raissa Damerg: Your submission is at User:Raissa Damergi/sandbox and has been declined by MatthewVanitas because there are no references at all. The box at the top declining the article gives you lots of information about how to rectify this, and tells you with clarity why it has been declined However, I would encourage you to work in other articles and let this one wither on the vine. There is no evidence that this autobiography is of a notable person in our sense however much those who love you find you notable. Autobiographies hurt folk the most when they write them and submit them. Please consider this before proceeding.

If you proceed please be very aware that the article will never be accepted without strong references from significant independent coverage in reliable sources. Fiddle Faddle 23:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elementary Cycles

Hello

My article for submission has been rejected for publication for notability reasons. The article was motivated by the fact that among the interpretations of quantum mechanics the voice Elementary Cycles was one of the few without a dedicated article.

I have provided a list of published peer reviewed papers related to this interpretation. I think that it is sufficiently notable as, for instance, it has been awarded in the FQXi contest in 2011, voted by a large general public.

How can I improve the article?

N4tur4le (talk) 20:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The comment added by the reviewer linked to a WikiProject Physics discussion about your article. It received two comments: a brief comment linking you to WP:OR (without the link, of course) and a concurring comment. So, at this point, it looks like editors had two complaints about your submission:

• It counted as WP:OR, which is Wikipedia shorthand for a link to the policy No original research, which itself means that the two editors thought that your submission was about something—in your case, an interpretation in the field of physics—which does not seem to be confirmed by any extant reliable, published sources.
• It also did not meet WP:GNG, which is the "official" reason adopted by the Articles for Creation reviewer. You evidently understand it; however, I believe that what the reviewer meant to say was that your submission is characterized by very long stretches devoid of any citations to reliable sources.

Hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 00:25, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear APerson

thank you for the advice. The article is definitively not about an WP:OR. All the information reported are extracted from many peer-review papers (15 only from D. Dolce) published in well-regarded scientific journals such as Science, Europhys.Lett., Ann. Phys. and Found.Phys. The idea and the mathematics at the base of this interpretation of quantum mechanics is supported by works of famous physicists such as the Nobel laureate G. 't Hooft, prof. R. Penrose, and has it origin from de Broglie, Einstein, Feynman, etc. The main citations are reported in the introduction of the article. I will explicitly report them, and add further peer-reviewed citations, in every section of the article, hoping to meet the editor requirements for non original researches. A more accurate evaluation of the editors will certainly reveal that this is not an Original Research. The notability is proven, e.g., by the fact that this interpretations has been awarded by in an important scientific contest (FQXi essay contest 2011).

I will add citations in the article and resubmit it for review.

Thank you.

N4tur4le (talk) 08:32, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Como Brothers Band

19:54:00, June 8, 2014 request for review by Bco66209

Bco66209 (talk) 19:54, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Marissa SmithBco66209 (talk) 19:54, 8 June 2014 (UTC) Dear Wikipedia Help Desk, Please restore and create this page. This band is notable according to the Criteria for musicians and ensembles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles

According to the Criteria for musicians and ensembles A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria:

The Como Brothers Band has met the below notable criteria: 9 ) Has won or placed in a major music competition

    Fulfilled  -  Won Ernie Ball Battle of the Band 2012

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warped_Tour_2012#Ernie_Ball_Battle_of_the_Bands_16_Winners

10) Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E for further clarifications).

    Fulfilled by having music played worldwide on the below Networks

1)Movie - Wingman Inc. (performer: "Can I Be Matched With You?", "You Are My World", "What They Say")

2)E! Network 2013 Keeping Up with the Kardashians (TV Series) (performer - 1 episode)

                  Episode -  We're Having a Baby! (2013) (performer: "Can I Be Matched With You?"

3)Oxygen Channels 2013 Best Ink (TV Series) (performer - 1 episode)

                Episode - A Family Affair (2013) "Your Love")

4) MTV’s 2012-2013 The Real World (TV Series) (performer - 2 episodes)

           Episode - Bondage, Butts and Burlesque (2013) ... (performer: "You Are My World")
          Episode - Clean Break (2012) ... (performer: "You Are My World", "Can I Be Matched With You?")

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm6398859/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 http://www.mtv.com/artists/the-como-brothers-band-1/

I need help in correctly referencing The Como Brothers Band winning in two categories in The 2014 Artist in Music Awards (Composer of the Year and Album of the Year) http://www.allindiemagazine.net/2014/02/a-successful-3rd-annual-artists-in.html . Other artists that have Wikipedia pages reference these awards (see Katie Cole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katie_Cole

Thank you in advance for your help.

I am also providing the link to the original page deletion. It seems that the original cause for deletion was not notability but stated here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_129#The_Como_Brothers_Band

I feel that I am struggling against negative feelings about bands and music here. Please help

Marissa Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bco66209 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

While this may prove notability, your article still needs to be sourced by reliable sources. IMDB and Wikipedia cannot be used as sources (see WP:UGC). Moreover, the competition does not seem very "major", so it may still fail the notability criteria. Darylgolden^(talk) 23:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

• Bco66209 (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    I have included the verifiable reliable sources/references for notable performances. 
Should I remove the reference to IMDB and the descriptions about the Ernie Ball Battle and the Artist in Music Awards.

Thank you, Bco66209 (talk) 20:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Marissa SmithBco66209 (talk) 20:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Canadian boxer Irish Eddie Carroll /Danny Doran Canadian hall of fame boxer

Hi,I have wrote this article of Canadian boxer Eddie Carroll,My Wikipedia user is Dannyboy 492 .I am trying to have this boxer's name added to the names of Canadian boxers in Canada . Canada's top JR lightweight for the Crown 1934,and Canad's top welterweight for the Canadian Championships..1935 Inducted to the Canadian boxing hall of fame[ Ottawa Ontario Canada] May 17 /1974. I need someone who can help Me enter His Name Thank You...Danny.[[[User:Dannyboy492|Dannyboy492]] (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)]

@Dannyboy492: This process is for new articles and your submission is not an article. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Senior Peer Counseling

My submission, "Senior Peer Counseling", was rejected because the editor said it read like an essay instead of an encyclopedia article. What is the difference? I do not understand how to correct my submission. Please help. Thank you!

Recordsmgr (talk) 22:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)Bob Milbourn Wikipedia talk:Articles for Creation/Senior Peer Counseling

@Recordsmgr: Not one of my more helpful reviews. My apologies. I suspect I managed to suffer from premature pressing of the submit button. The difference between an essay and an encyclopaedia article is a subjective "I know it when I see it one" and this does not help you at all. "Essay" is really a shorthand for "Needs to be substantially more concise, and the tone needs to be inspected to ensure it is neutral, flat, and factual." In addition essays are almost always light on referencing. My approach with this article would be to look at each sentence and ask myself "Does this sentence add value to the article?" and "Is this fact asserted i this sentence referenced properly from significant independent coverage in WP:RS?" A negative answer is your cue to cut. Finally I would ask "Is the tone now that of an encyclopaedia?" Our job is to be interesting but wholly neutral, factual but not bullet pointed, and always to be referenced in WP:RS. Fiddle Faddle 23:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:INTEGRIS

I just created a page for INTEGRIS Health that was rejected. I was hoping someone could tell me why it was rejected. INTEGRIS is the largest hospital system in Oklahoma and many of its individual centers have pages, so I'm confused as to why the organization itself wouldn't be substantial. I was hoping to create this page to unite the other pages of INTEGRIS and create a more comprehensive series of articles about INTEGRIS — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhitleyOConnor (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@WhitleyOConnor: It seems that it was not declined previously. I have now reviewed it, was unable to accept it, and have left you full details at the head of the article. I can;t see any other articles in your contribution history, and I am unsure why you consider that it had been declined previously. I hope you enjoy the extra research you need to do to get the article accepted. Fiddle Faddle 23:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@Timtrent I must have been confused. Someone sent me a message saying they saw that my article was rejected at the Articles for Creation before I posted this thread. I'm not sure why/how that happened. However, I have added a number of outside sources to bulk up the reference section as well as replacing some references from the entity the article is about to better legitimize the article. Thank you for the suggestions!

WhitleyOConnor (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@WhitleyOConnor: While awaiting your reviewer, please do the thing you missed: removal of inline URLs. I try very hard not to re-revioew an article. It is far better to have new eyes upon it, but it will not be accepted with the inline URLs in it. I will leave anything else to the next reviewer. Fiddle Faddle 17:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

June 3

Review of Draft:Studio Under

Hello. I've been told that my submission had been denied. I would be happy to understand what to improve/change so it would be accepted.

Best regards,

Eran Gal-Or — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.5.10 (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

We can't tell which article you are talking about, but the reasons are given in the centre of the pink box on the article, with links in there to pages that explain the various terms. Rankersbo (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, found it now. There are no independent, reliable sources to the article. There are lots of external links to the websites of various entities referrerd to in the article, which prove those entities exist and nothing more. The links don't say anything about Studio Under. You need references that talk about Studio Under, and the events and facts in your article. Rankersbo (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Katch 22

I have edited the article for the band Katch 22 many times and all of the information is correct and available to be checked on the internet, i.e.record release dates etc. Why is it not entered on the website. (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)). mike-Eastman (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)).

@Mike-eastman: Because this is what you submitted. What else could be done here?

Mike-eastman, it looks as if your draft had been deleted as an abandoned draft, a few hours before you tried to re-submit it. See [1]. To get it reinstated as a draft, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Good Katch, V. I should have spotted that. Fiddle Faddle 20:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UK Data Service

Hi there I've responded to the original reviewer's concerns about citations and updated the page, but I can't figure out how to re-submit it. Can you help? Many thanks. Scozzolino (talk) 13:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

You deleted the review templates and comments at the top of the page - I have just restored it. There is a big blue button in the pink template for resubmitting. Please do not delete any of the review stuff at the top of the page - it is the record of the progress of the draft and also has many links to advice and help pages. It is automatically removed when the article gets accepted, but until then it needs to be kept. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:GreenLips/Sandbox

Hi, y wife and I have been trying to post articles for wiki's review. Subject titled "Bill Haney". We have put probably 50hrs into trying to get this very worthy man listed. We keep getting deleted even through we are carefully following the many many many rules. We have submitted newspaper articles and a bio and it just keeps getting swallowed up - deleted with messages saying different reasons. The latest being "deleted: out of scope. Can someone please work with us? Thank you in advance to any one who tries to help us GreenLips (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: Submissions like yours are problematic. Your words above hint that you have a conflict of interest. I might suggest quitting this effort altogether.

That said, here are my comments: You'll need to add in-line citations for all your assertions. Much of that content (high school, personal life) is really not important enough to mention. Your subject doesn't appear to meet any subject-specific notability criteria so you'd need to make a case for WP:GNG. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: In answer to your questions at my talk page: Your file uploads can be found at Special:ListFiles/GreenLips. You uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which is a sister project. WP:CITE does not require that you provide scans of newspaper articles (File:SundayOaklandPress,1997.png, File:NYTimes,Apr1993.png, File:JacksonCitizenPatriot,Mar2002.png, File:Detroiter1990.png, and File:BirminghamEccentric,Dec1989.png), you only have to list which periodical, on what day, on what page, as well as the title and author. I'm sorry that was unclear to you.

When you use phrases like "very worthy man" and "someone who truly deserves it", it makes me doubt your objectivity. We are writing an encyclopedia; we're not here to celebrate heroes or condemn villains. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: : May I suggest Wikipedia:Mentorship? Fiddle Faddle 20:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Relativistic Global Non-Inertial Reference Frames

My recent;y submitted paper Relativistic Global Non Inertial Frames was declined for copyright violations. I would like to know which parts of the article the reviewer feels that there is too much overlap with published work ..

H Crater

Hcrater (talk) 14:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Hcrater. According to the deleting administrator, [2] it was an unambiguous copyright infringement from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.3257. That article appears to be co-authored by someone with a name similar to yours. Are you one of the authors? The problem is, even if you are the author and hold the copyright, if it has been previously published, then we cannot publish substantial chunks and/or paraphrases from it on Wikipedia unless it has been released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. I was unable to find anything to confirm what license it had been released under on either the article or its abstract page. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. – Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Hcrater: I was very specific in my comments but perhaps the submission was blanked before you could read them. You wrote a very technical paper hosted by Cornell University and recreated that content in your submission. I determined that fact by Googling random sentences in your submission. We value your contributions but we cannot host someone else's content. When using even public domain content, you must leave a clear notification that the content had already been published elsewhere. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2014 (UTCIt

((reply to Chris Troutman)) Yes, I am a coauthor with Lusanna on the arxiv paper paper you googled. Our article is a distillation of our arxive paper. Would it be possible to resubmit the article with this notification (i.e. that it is a distillation of the arxiv paper)? HCrater Hcrater (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hcrater , minimally you have to list the source(s) for any Wikipedia article, but a "distillation" (from what Chris says, the draft contained verbatim sentences, etc.) requires evidence that the paper has been previously published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Until that is in place, the draft cannot be restored. Voceditenore (talk) 16:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

((reply to Chris Troutman)) I have contacted the distribition arxiv for the purpose of finding the liscense

agreement all contributors agree to. The URL with the details is http://arxiv.org/help/license The particular portion of that agreement I believe relevent is... " In order to submit an article to arXiv, the submitter must either: •grant arXiv.org a non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article, and certify that they have the right to grant this license, •certify that the work is available under either the Creative Commons Attribution license, or the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, and that they have the right to grant this license, or •certify that the work is in the public domain (we will store this information by associating the Create Commons Public Domain Declaration with the submission)...."

Please let me know if this is sufficient to allow me to have my article restored to my sandbox for further editing that would explicitly state it is a distillation based on the arxiv article and any other necesssary editing you would recommend. Horace Crater Hcrater (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's not sufficient, Hcrater. You must provide proof that your article was specifically released either into the public domain (highly unlikely) or under the Creative Commons Attribution license. We do not accept the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, as all text on Wikipedia must be available for commercial use. This will probably entail an email from arXiv with a copy of the original submission which specifies the license. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. Voceditenore (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello ::((reply to Chris Troutman)) I received the following note from the Cornell arxiv Dear Horace Crater, We do not provide any document regarding this. You should send them the link to our documentation regarding the licenses. --arXiv admin

Here is the note the above was a response to.. Dear arxiv admin, Thank you for your helpful response. Is there a way I can provide proof to Wikipedia that my article was specifically released either into the public domain or under the Creative Commons Attribution license? Horace Crater

So, it looks like I have come to the end of my rope..My mistake was to submit to Wikipedia a paper that was based on a specific article instead of one based on a general subject area. I will contact my coauthor to determine our next step. I suspect we will resubmit an article based on a general subject area which includes the area of the arxiv paper but not exclusively. In that event it would be most helpful if I could obtain the ascii version of the sandbox as there were many tedious details we may want to reuse. One suggestion would be for you to restore it for a few hours and when I copied it for my records I could notify you and then you could delete it permanently. Thanks in advance for any help in this regard. Horace Crater Hcrater (talk) 18:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@Hcrater: Again, I want to reiterate that we appreciate you bringing your technical knowledge to Wikipedia. Our rules are firm on this matter. Also, as WP:DCM explains this help desk can't process any type of permissions documentation. Contact would have to go through WP:OTRS.

If you'd like your draft restored in order to copy it, see WP:REFUND. My suggestion would be to write a new article using your paper as a source as well as your other sources together rather than re-create a copyrighted work. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Craig Henderson

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haileesettle (talk • contribs) 15:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Haileesettle . I have removed the copy of your draft which you had pasted in here. The link to it sufficient. Can you let us know what your question is or what sort of help you are seeking with the draft? Voceditenore (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Local 77 Duke Labor Union

Hi, I was just wondering if I could receive edits for my Wikipedia article on the Local 77 Labor Union. Thanks. Karenli2014 (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Karenli2014. What do you mean by "receive edits"? Are you asking for someone to help you with the draft? Or are you asking for a review? You have currently submitted it for a review (half an hour ago). Unfortunately, a review may take more than 3 weeks. The Articles for creation process is very highly backlogged. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Hexagon Geospatial

Hi,

There is a note on my talk page that the article I submitted, Draft:Hexagon Geospatial, was not accepted because it contained copyrighted information. I don't understand.

None of the text of the article is copyrighted. It does include copyrighted images - the Hexagon Geospatial company logo, for example. Is it possible for you to look back and see if it was rejected because of the copyrighted images? Or if there was something else in it the reviewers thought was copyrighted?

Aren't company logos normally copyrighted? If yes, then how do other people include them on pages they create for their companies?

The page has been deleted for me, but I am hoping you have a record of it somewhere.

Thanks, Slhuff (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Slhuff

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider checking out WP:REFUND. Hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 00:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Slhuff, According to the administrator who deleted the draft [3], it copied or closely paraphrased the text at http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/data-management-compression.aspx and other pages on that website. That website is clearly marked © Copyright 2014 Intergraph Corporation. As such, it will not be refunded. You will need to re-write the draft in your own words. But before you try that, I strongly suggest that you read:

• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

And if this applies to you, also read:

• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."

Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Rick Rosas

Hi, I am having difficulty with the submitted article on Rick Rosas. The references are confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey909 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mikey909: Please would you explain your rather large question in bite sized chunks? Before you do, please read WP:REFB in case it helps your thinking.

Remember that references are intended to corroborate facts you have asserted in the article. They must come from significant coverage independent of Rosas, and in WP:RS Fiddle Faddle 20:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Liam.bertuzzi/sandbox

I was woundering why my great important article didn't make it through and I would like the honest truth pleaseLiam.bertuzzi (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

To quote the comment left by the reviewer:

It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous over being factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time.

I think this more or less sums it up. APerson (talk!) 00:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Liam.bertuzzi. you already asked the same question here and received an answer yesterday [4]. Your behaviour and your "article" is disruptive and wasting everyone's time. Please stop it now. Voceditenore (talk) 07:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC

Hi there,

I'm new to posting on Wikipedia and am hoping to gain an understanding of what I can do/change to have my article published post rejection; Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC

Appreciate any/all help!

Best, schansler

Schansler (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Schansler. The reviewer left some good guidance and links for you on your draft. I'm assuming you haven't read them? In any case, please read the following which apply to all editors, and especially to ones who are writing about subjects with which they have an affiliation:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Voceditenore (talk) 07:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Fashionbi

Why my article was declined? Could you provide us with a better guidelines so we can post it correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fashionbi (talk • contribs) 23:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Fashionbi, did you read the reasons for the decline at the top of your draft, click on the guidance links you were given, and read them? Your draft was blatantly promotional and had no references whatsoever, let alone ones to independent reliable sources, e.g.

Fashionbi is an multicultural company, headquartered in Milan, Italy and Shanghai, China, which empower professionals to make smart decisions in the fashion and luxury industry.

The fact that you cannot even see how promotional and inappropriate the text is for an encyclopedia is a prime example of why Wikipedia strongly discourages editing with a conflict of interest. If you want some guides please read the following:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Please do not submit the draft again until it is written in a neutral point of view, and referenced to multiple independent sources.

Voceditenore (talk) 07:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

June 4

Looking for guidance and help for creating good wikipedia page

Hi Wiki,

Our wikipedia was tagged as copyrighted information and promotional. Do you have a guide or helpful resources in creating page for our organization?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks,

--Designthatrock (talk) 01:57, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Designthatrock, your deleted draft Draft:Limitless Ventures Inc. was a blatant copy of http://www.limitlessventures.org/about/.

The fact that you cannot even see how promotional and inappropriate the text was for an encyclopedia is a prime example of why Wikipedia strongly discourages editing with a conflict of interest. If you want some guides please read the following:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Voceditenore (talk) 06:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Asia Pacific Vision

Dear sir or madam,

I am confused why the article was declined, perhaps there's something I can fix and resubmit again? Thanks.

Warm regards, Paul Hongkong2015 (talk) 02:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear sir or madam, I'm not sure why my article was declined. Is there anything I can do about it? The link to my article is

Draft:Asia Pacific Vision

Many thanks for your help in advance.

Regards,

Paul Mak

Hongkong2015 (talk) 06:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Paul. I don't blame you for being confused. This was a draft about a clearly real news agency but was declined with the following reason given:

The proposed article is not suitable for Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles on fictional subjects should cover their real-world context and contain sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance—not just a summary of the plot.

The reviewer (User:JustBerry) was using an automated script and most probably checked the wrong reason for the decline by mistake. My impression from the four references you've used is that this subject probably would meet the criteria for inclusion (See WP:ORG). I suggest that instead of simply listing them in a separate section, you add them as inline citations (see Help:Referencing for beginners) and perhaps find more sources, e.g. "Faux better or worse: fact and fiction are blurring as the taste for faux-news rises." in Television Asia (April 2004). Also be aware that Wikipedia articles about companies, especially if written by editors associated with those companies, come under special scrutiny (and rightly so). My advice would be to shorten the article, and make it it as matter-of-fact, neutral, and boring as possible, i.e. written in encyclopedic style. It's current style is not too bad as company articles go, but there's still room for improvement. Voceditenore (talk) 07:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll also ask User:DGG, who is especially experienced in reviewing articles like this, if he has some further input on this. Voceditenore (talk) 07:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

First, I must apologize for the bad reviewing. Our use of this script is an anachronism--it is too susceptible to error, and anyone qualified to review should be capable of writing a proper delete reason that explains the proper reason in detail. Myself, I almost always write a custom message and almost never use the script. The sooner we get rid of the entire current AfC structure, the better our reviewing will be. The problem with the article, as I see them is primarily the rather informal promotional tone, It will help to remove all, or almost all adjectives. Then let me know on my talk page. DGG ( talk ) 09:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I concur with DGG's use of comments. This reviewer was indulging in a series of unlikely reviews. and had been discouraged. I hoped all had been caught. Hongkong2015 you deserve our apologies. Accidents happen, even in the best regulated houses. Fiddle Faddle 11:00, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:4INFO

*confused* First I made the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:4INFO with about 250 citations, then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drumlineramos does what I thought was an awesome job wikifying it, & now it's rejected because of not enough citations. I'm also confused how to leave Drumlineramos a message. TY! MarkMillerITPro (talk) 14:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi MarkMillerITPro. I am the reviewer who declined the article today. I can only review what I see, and I hope my comment on PR (etc) is useful for you. To send a message to Drumlineramos you simply visit their talk page at User talk:Drumlineramos, create a new section and ask your question of them.

It is by no means unusual for Wikipedia editors to disagree, but our overall objective with the WP:AFC route to to do our utmost to ensure that an article that is accepted is unlikely to be challenged for WP:N or WP:V, and references in WP:RS that are about the entity and independent of the entity are vital in this. Being nominated for deletion hurts. Being declined is simply a delay. Fiddle Faddle 18:17, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.*chuckle* Cool. TY!

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 20:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Timtrent that an article accepted at AfC should be able to pass AfD, but when uncertain, I usually accept it. There often is doubt, because even after many years of experience there, I am not able to predict what would necessarily happen at AfD, where decisions are sometimes rather peculiar, or at least random. A possibly acceptable article should not depend on my personal guess, and I think it best to let it take its chances . Additionally, articles exposed to view at AfD often do get improved during their process there; certainly they have a better chance of getting community attention there than they do here. (Some editors have said that a 50% chance of passing AfD is good enough to accept--I try to use a higher standard of at least 60%, but numbers aren't all that meaningful.) DGG ( talk ) 05:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos. Today I stumbled on an article I hadn't seen about King of SMS and AdMob of SMS. I added it. Anyone willing to take a look & let me know it's ok?

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos. Then I remembered another article, & I've added it. It's citation #13. imo that would help with "significant and independent coverage of the org". Could you 3 or someone else take a look & let me know if that was helpful?

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 18:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos I stumbled on an article I had seen before, that also may help with "significant and independent coverage of the org". Altho I added it, it's citation 16, imo it's a little clunky how I wrote it, and you may have a better idea.

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos I think I fixed the clunkiness. Let me know if you think the draft needs something further. TY!

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 18:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I was doing something else today & found yet another article regarding notoriety. I think this draft is ready for publication. TY! 22:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• I looked at it, and, since it appears there may be sources for notability on the basis of market share, I made a preliminary pass at editing it to remove the unusually extensive promotionalism. Listing every imaginable see also and category is promotionalism . Giving a "for example" illustration of the firm's advertising technique is promotionalism. Listing more of its social marketing sites than its own website is promotionalism,

I have not yet checked to see which of the references are based of press releases; possibly most of them are, in which case they will need to be removed. I think it would probably pass AfD, but I am reluctant to accept an article with such sources. I am not sure why I contributed this amount of work to an article in a subject in which I have no interest, except perhaps to demonstrate the almost inevitable low quality of coi editing. DGG ( talk ) 01:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Probably because you are a decent person, DGG Fiddle Faddle 16:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I looked at the edits. No problem from my perspective.

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 01:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos Last night I did find a reference that had byline PRWIRE, & switched that out to a more reliable source. Anyone willing to take a look?

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 15:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• @MarkMillerITPro: I'm going to stay away, I think. I try not to get too close to articles I review. If you think it is ready after listening to various pieces of advice, simply resubmit it. You can continue to improve it after resubmitting. Fiddle Faddle 16:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

"Probably because you are a decent person" That's what I thought your motive was. I'm father of large blended family. very messy. very close. Lots of opinions. I'm inclined to wait and see if anyone else will take one more look & possibly accept it, because I've been thru submission 2xs, & it sits there for more than 30 days each time is how I experience it. Is it not likely to be accepted without submitting again? Thanks! MarkMillerITPro (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

that afcs take 30 days to improve is in one sense our fault, but it is an almost inevitable failing because of the shortage of competent reviewers. If every really experienced editor took a hand and did a few on a regular basis, we could deal with it better. But in a project like WP there's just no way to get people to do anything they do not want to. The fix will therefore have to be to the process, and the best immediate things I can think of are1. to simply accept acceptable articles, rather than sent them back for minor improvements which could be made after acceptance, 2. to remember to remove G11s and test pages immediately, 3. and strongly discourage people from submitting hopeless articles repeatedly, all these would reduce the workload by at least half. A proper process first separates out the obvious, so there is time to spend on the ones that need it. DGG ( talk ) 00:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent.:Hi DGG.:Hi Drumlineramos I didn't notice DGG's comment about needing another 2008 reference, & found another reference tonight. TY!

Help request

The article I drafted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The African Americans: Many Rivers to Crosswas declined because I improperly used in-line citations and subheadings. Before I try to resubmit, can I get some help on this?

Thanks! Kmburke76 (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)Kevin

@Kmburke76: Thank you for coming here. As the reviewer in question I'm not sure how best to answer your question. Is it that my explanation was unhelpful, or do you need more technical help? I do not visit this page regularly, so, if you need a fast answer from me rather than from others, please {{ping}} me Fiddle Faddle 17:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Neither was reason to delete the article. The only reason I do not accept it immediately is that it is written as a press release,and I wonder if it is not copied from one. Please omit judgments and adjective, use fewer & shorter quotations,and rely less on Gates. As for headings , see Help:Cheatsheet.(hint: look at the code of exiting articles) But this could have been improved later, trivial matters of style are not a reason for rejection. As for references, we prefer but do not require that every significant fact have a source that is obvious, and it's preferred that every paragraph at least have one. But except for BLPs, they are required only for facts likely to be challenged, and I do not see any. Except for a BLP, or a contentious article, this too is a matter of improvement, not rejection. Articles do not have to be perfect, justgood enough to holdup at AfD. DGG ( talk ) 19:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Technical 13 (contribs•talk)

What does everyone who monitors this page think of the new header for each section for those that use the ask link in the header? I did it for multiple reasons, first, it's a pain to find which section they commented in when there are multiple "Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here" sections. Second, since we are dealing with mostly new users here, it will be nice to have a nice big link to their contributions in the header (in case they actually sign and are using the default signature). Third, since we are scattered with submissions in User:, User_talk:, Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/, Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/, Draft:, and Draft_talk: now, it would be just too unmanagable to leave it as "Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/" or even change it to "Draft:". So, I eliminated that element all together. I'd be happy to add a preload template that will allow them to add a link directly to their draft in a {{La}} style template if that is wanted and people think it will be appropriately used. (I might even be able to create a custom substitutable template that will check if there is actually anything on the page they list (and try to find the most plausible namespace if it's not quite where they say it is), but that will take me a little of experimenting)... Let me know what you all think. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Probably a good idea (or something like it), Technical 13. But wouldn't it be better to post this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation for more input? Most of the people here are very busy just replying to queries about submissions. Voceditenore (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Technical 13, your original heading here read:

Review of submission by [[User:Technical 13}}|Technical 13}}]] ([[Special:Contribs/Technical 13}}|contribs]]•[[User_talk:Technical 13}}|talk]]

Did you intend those stranded curly brackets and non-working links? I've edited to what I think you meant it to look like. Please change it back, if it's not what you meant. Voceditenore (talk) 16:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

• Ye, thank you, and I've fixed it in the preloadtitle in the actual link. Thanks again.. The reason I posted here instead of there, is you are the people that have to see them and navigate with them all the time.. You are the directly affected audience. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

• Support but with a question. What happens when the same editor opens a new section every tome they come here. Some of the editors here are very new and not yet in 'flying solo' mode. I agree (in advance) that it is a smaller problem than the one you are solving. Fiddle Faddle 17:51, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I considered that, and the only possible solution is to add a time&date to each header. If it's wanted, it can certainly be done. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:57, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
• Okay, so I've started to work on the preload template (and more specifically the template it will rely on for the links to the draft [{{Lafc}}]) and you guys can check them out and follow my progress as I work on them. Time for me to head to class now, but I'll work on this more later. The preload is at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/preload. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:14, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I almost forgot to mention, I've also added a navigational box in the lower left corner of the page that will be static as you scroll up and down through the requests so it will be easy to get to the top, toc, today's requests, and bottom of the page. I can expand that or collapse it upon request. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sébastien Dewaest

Accepted Moved to Sebastien Dewaest for me, recreate again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.162.137 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)‎ Delete moved to restart a Sebastien Dewaest will becomes a article for users — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.162.137 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)‎

Hello 86.15.162.137. You cannot accept your own article unless you are an autoconfirmed registered editor, but today I accepted it and moved it to article space. I also created a re-direct for it from Sebastian Dewaest. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Abbeyokuns (contribs•talk)

Hi Reviewer,

please does it mean when i write something in the sandbox it can go live to become an article..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbeyokuns (talk • contribs) 20:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Abbeyokuns. Work in your sandbox will only go into article space if you move it there or if you submit it to Articles for Creation and a reviewer accepts the draft and moves it into article space. However, your sandbox is visible on Wikipedia (and to some search engines). I see that User:Abbeyokuns/sandbox was deleted because it contained copyright material from http://www.vanguardngr.com/2014/03/player-can-bribe-keshi/. You cannot paste copyright text anywhere on Wikipedia, including your user pages. If you want to work on a draft, you will need to write it in your own words. Voceditenore (talk) 07:18, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

June 5

Review of submission by FloLau123 (contribs•talk)

Regarding the submitted page titling as "Poman Lo", will appreciate to advise the reason for declining the relevant submission. It will be grateful to share the tips on how to pass the submission review. Thks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FloLau123 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello FloLau123. Your (Draft:Poman Lo) was declined for a lack of inline citations. These are important for biographies of living. people. I have now formatted your references as inline citations. However, before re-submitting, I suggest you find further press coverage of Ms. Lo. I suspect she would met our criteria for inclusion if you can find further independent sources. The one you already have, a lengthy article about her in the The Standard (Hong Kong), is a good start. Look for more like this. Also a reference for the fact that the children's series she devised and produced has won an award. Note that while it is preferable to have references in English, you can also use ones from the Chinese language press if necessary. Hope that helps, Voceditenore (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by 69.171.187.22 (contribs•talk)

Could someone take this information for me and write an article on it in order for a wiki page to come into being later? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4471193/?mode=desktop&ref_=m_ft_dsk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.187.22 (talk) 05:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello 69.171.187.22. This is a help desk for editors who are working on drafts. This is not the place to request that someone write an article for you. If you wish to request that, please go to Wikipedia:Requested articles. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Regaining use of Ambrosia10/sandbox after a redirect from there to Draft:Charlotte Cortlandt Ellis after draft has been accepted.

I was drafting my first article for Wikipedia in my sandbox and submitted it for review. I wasn't surprised that the reviewer declined to accept the article but he/she instead redirected the draft article from my sandbox into a Draft:Charlotte Cortlandt Ellis page. After some work my first article was accepted today but I am unsure now how to get the use of my sandbox back in order to plan my second article. I know there is probably an easy fix I'm just such a novice at this that I'm not sure what it is. Could you help?Ambrosia10 (talk) 05:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from User:Ambrosia10/sandbox)

Redirect page

1. REDIRECTCharlotte Cortlandt Ellis

Ambrosia10 (talk) 05:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• Hello, Ambrosia10. I've removed the redirect from your sandbox. You can go ahead and use it for your next draft. In future, you can do that yourself for any pages in your own user space. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Chow Sang Sang (contribs•talk)

Hello! This is Chow Sang Sang. Noted that my article is not accepted. Could you explain why it's not accepted? And could you give me specific examples or point out some lines in my article which are not accepted, for my easy understanding and I can improve it as soon as I can. Thanks very much!

Title of my submission: Chow Sang Sang (Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Chow_Sang_Sang) Chow Sang Sang (talk) 07:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately not, you have asked this question a little too late. The article was declined at the beginning of December last year, and as you hadn't done anything about it in over six months it was assumed you had lost interest in developing it the article was deleted. If you do want to continue working on this article, please follow the instructions on your talk page for recovering the deleted page.

Please be aware before continuing that writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. Rankersbo (talk) 08:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Tom De Beuckelaer

Dear reader,

I have a question regarding my submission of the article on Tom de Beuckelaer. Draft:Tom De Beuckelaer

My submission got declined, because the references do not adequately evidence the notability. However, six independent references of different countries are used to support the notability of this article. Not many articels are supported by references of so many countries. In my opinion, significant evidence has been provided to support that this article is worthy of inclusion. Therefore, I would like the submmission to be reconsidered. In the case it is still not accepted, I would appreciate more thorough feedback.

Pantapasin (talk) 10:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott McDonald

Greetings. I would appreciate any help in improving the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott McDonald. I have received helpful feedback along the way and have done my best to follow the sage advice and provide accurate sourcing. Unfortunately, the article was rejected, with feedback saying "Public relations mentions and internal industry mentions do not show notability."

At this point, I do have to admit I am a bit confused. I have sources in this article from BusinessWeek,the NY Times and Wharton School of Business among other notable and independent sources. Sources referred to as "internal industry mentions," are actually citations from independent B2B publications.

As this was my first attempt at submitting an article, I had originally borrowed sourcing ideas from an existing page for a person in a similar role as Scott: the CEO of the Boston Consulting Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Lesser. Rich Lesser's references include links to a press release, his bio on BCG's site and his LinkedIn account. After my first round of feedback, I cleaned out similar references for Scott. Would it help to re-include them? Just want to make sure I am following proper procedures. I do feel the article in it's current state does meet the standards of notability as posted on Wikipedia, and surpasses the standards set by pages already approved. Thanks much in advance for your review. (Kingman13 (talk) 12:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC))

Review of submission by 78.186.147.222 (contribs•talk)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biotekno http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotekno

Hello,

my new post was deleted couple of times with the following comments: u sayfa silinmiş. Sayfanın silme ve taşıma kaydı referans için aşağıda verilmiştir.

16:38, 4 Haziran 2014 Eldarion (Mesaj | Katkılar) Biotekno sayfasını sildi (Madde 6: Kayda değer olmayan oluşum: .) 16:58, 29 Mayıs 2014 Eldarion (Mesaj | Katkılar) Biotekno sayfasını sildi (Genel 11: Reklam amaçlı sayfa: .) 08:12, 14 Mayıs 2014 Eldarion (Mesaj | Katkılar) Biotekno sayfasını sildi (Madde 6: Kayda değer olmayan oluşum)

I have tried to get comments from the modereator but my comments were also deleted :)

I would like to change the page moderator or get a detailed explanation.

Thanks. (78.186.147.222 (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC))

This help page relates to the English Wikipedia. If you wish to ask a question regarding the Turkish Wikipedia, you need to do so there. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by SlatersGarage (contribs•talk)

Hi, all... My recent submission Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dean M. Brenner was rejected a couple weeks ago, and I was hoping for some clarification as to why... The feedback I received had said something about "submissions for a fictional character," which didn't make sense to me, as the subject of my submission is, in fact, real... Any additional input you can provide that would help me edit my submission into acceptance would be most appreciated. Thanks, SlatersGarageSlatersGarage (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@SlatersGarage: This was part of the JustBerry mess. I am re-reviewing the article now. Fiddle Faddle 14:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Maciek_Pysz

Hello

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Maciek_Pysz was not approved yesterday on the grounds that the subject is not notable enough. I checked the notability guidelines for musicians when I created the article and I am sure the subject meets them so I would like to know how to improve my article so it can be accepted. All my sources are reliable, they are major jazz websites.

He has two albums ( one released, the other in the studio for release later this year) on a major UK Jazz label which has many famous jazz musicians in its catalogue. He had reviews of his debut album in 4 major jazz newspapers (not blogs) including All about Jazz (a major US jazz magazine) and Jazzwise which is the major UK jazz magazine. One of the people in his trio is already in Wikipedia ( Asaf Sirkis) so he is connected to a notable person. He is connected to another notable Wikipedia person (Aar Maanta) by appearing on Aar Maanta's album. I put accurate references to all 4 reviews. He received funding from UK Jazz Services (after applying against a lot of competition from other talented musicians) for touring and recording, so the quality of his work is very high and that is valdated by his having received funding for both recording and touring.

Also was there a problem with my referencing? Each reference is verifiable and opens the correct page to the reference. One article is from a magazine to which I provide a month and the author of the review. How do I improve the referencing with the sources I have?

I do not know how else to make the subject notable. Please help. Thank you.

Marycjames (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2014 (UTC)Marycjames

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jerry Cooke (Yuri Kutschuk)

My wiki article is not an autobiography. Yuri Kutschuk is deceased, Oct. 18, 1921 - Oct. 27, 2005. He was a famous LIFE & Sports Illustrated photographer, like Neil Liefer and Alfred Eisenstaedt, who have wiki pages. Please advise on how to have my page reviewed again with the least delay, without re-entering all the information on the page? And, will I still need to change the username? I look forward to your answer. Thank you. Yurikutschuk (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sacha Dunable

 Done this draft is may be done - 86.15.162.137 (talk), 15:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Accepted move to Sacha Dunable as a article for Intronauts, per Reviewer 86.15.162.137 (talk), 15:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)  Added as an article on wikipedia, we should redirect to Sacha Dunable, 86.15.162.137 (talk), 15:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Enaronch (contribs•talk)

What was the reason my article was declined? I'm the manager of the artist that I'm writing about. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enaronch (talk • contribs) 17:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Your article has been declined as it is written in Chinese. This is the English Wikipedia, either write your article in English or rewrite it on the Chinese Wikipedia. Darylgolden^(talk) 01:19, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Jessegalebaker/sandbox -- Warning message from system

I submitted new article content from my user sandbox. The yellow "Review Waiting" box is there; however a warning message also appears:

Reviewer tools[show] Warning: This page should probably be moved, but a page already exists at Draft:Sandbox.

Is this a problem? Jessegalebaker (talk) 17:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Northcotemusic (contribs•talk)

Hello, My article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Northcote (band) has been approved and classed as "start class". I have made the recommended edits. When will I know when it has been re-assessed and/or when it has passed official review? Northcotemusic (talk) 18:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Northcotemusic: It has been approved, you say? That is it. It has been approved. See Northcote (band) Fiddle Faddle 07:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Some Kind of Fairy Tale

In this draft article I submitted, at the bottom of the page it says "Draft waiting review." But at the top of the page it says "Draft not submitted for review." Which is correct? Is there anything I should do to facilitate the review? Jack Orion (talk) 18:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@JackOrion217: It is a foible of the various 'behind the scenes scripts', you need not be concerned. Technical 13 is this something the rewrite of the scripts is handling? Fiddle Faddle 22:35, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• Not yet, but I'm hoping to have a fix for that when I get working on the guided tour pages for draft space (which will move the submission status off the actual draft on to the /editnotice page). There most certainly should be a fix in the next 6-12 months (maybe sooner if I ever get "that" kind of free time to dig in). — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of submission by Beatnik Party (contribs•talk)

Hello, editors:

I am wondering what else I would need to link to in order to qualify this band (see link at end) for notability. They are on a "major" indie label (as far as they exist) with four LPs, and they are constantly touring nationally. I don't want to link to their gigs page in the article just to prove it, since that seems silly. They've had write-ups in many publications, but not yet any national papers or magazines (such as the NYT). The articles that I thought were relevant and notable, and still accessible, I linked to. (They did receive a mention in the New Yorker's Talk of the Town, but hey.)

The thing is the band is by its nature probably always going to remain somewhat under the radar. They are probably one of the premier examples of "chamber pop" in the country, but that's not exactly a chart-busting genre. I also see a whole lot of bands that are less notable in many respects but who have managed somehow to get an entry.

Please do be assured that I am in NO WAY affiliated with this band besides liking them. They have no idea who I am and I've never met them. I just thought they deserve at least an acknowledgment of their existence. What else do they need to do or provide in order to prove their notability that I have not included in the article as it stands? After reading the notability guidelines, it seems like they are pretty well qualified.

Thank you for your help!

This is the first article I have ever submitted, so please excuse anything I am doing wrong here!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cuddle_Magic_(band)

Beatnik Party (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You say "They are on a "major" indie label" which one? Please indicate who they have released their LPs through? And please back up this info with a link to reliable source. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

19:39:35, 5 June 2014 review of submission by Technical 13

• Technical 13 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Example (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • User:Example (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Fiddle Faddle, this should address your concern of multiple sections by the same user. The template I created, {{Lafc}} should be able to take just about any pagename form and return if there are any pages with that name in Mainspace, WT:Afc/ space, Draft:, or the user's userspace (may have issues with drafts that are directly on their userpage or more than one subpage deep, still working on that). I think this is an improvement over my last modification, what do you think? All comments on the changes are welcome. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 19:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Technical 13: Well, yes, but look one section below Fiddle Faddle 22:18, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• Fiddle Faddle, they didn't quite read the instructions and made half of a wikilink... I hadn't thought about that possible error, but it would be easy for the responding helper to fix (like I just did) and as you can see, the template found a submission in both Draft: and Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/ so that will need to be addressed and see if a merge is appropriate. ;) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• Seems it found a redirect and an article, but I see what you mean. Keep going. Fiddle Faddle 22:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

• I do need to fix it to SUBST that template or the username won't be what it is suppose to be.. (thinking out loud)... Unless I create a new parameter to make the username static... Fixing that part... Also trying to fix the talk page links as they are off... — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

22:04:52, 5 June 2014 review of submission by DRHaken

• DRHaken (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Helen Hoover (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Review of Draft:Long finned Perth Mint Surgeon Fish

I am doing this for a school project, it is all 100% false, i plan to keep it on wiki for 2 weeks, i am proving to many teachers across the world that wikipedia is a viable source, and that people will edit it , probably within minutes, if it does go life. My teachers always say that Wikipedia is not a viable source because ANYONE can edit it, but this is not true, it is the MOST viable source since ANYONE can edit it, it is the most updated collection in the entire world, i couldn't of asked for a better library.

Thanks,

              Bennett

207.68.250.104 (talk) 22:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@207.68.250.104: I think you've successfully proven your teacher's point. Hoaxes aren't allowed on Wikipedia so I've nominated your draft for deletion. I appreciate your enthusiasm and I encourage you to register for an account to become a regular editor. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Taylor Steele (filmmaker)

I am trying to create an article on filmmaker Taylor Syeele titles Draft:Taylor Steele (filmmaker) who is a notable subject, the article has been rejected 4 times and i am addressing each problem but still being rejected, can i please have some advice on the latest rejection as the reviewers comments are the same as first rejection and those issues were addressed, thank you Peterogers88 (talk) 01:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done. See comments at Draft:Taylor Steele (filmmaker). Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

01:09:54, 6 June 2014 review of submission by Arnlodg

• Arnlodg (talk · contribs)

I'm in sand box (learning about wiki and editing) This is my second draft, Could you critique encylopedic tone and sources, thanks. Arnlodg (talk) 01:09, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done. See comments therein from Dodger. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

June 6

08:01:49, 6 June 2014 review of submission by Schmuels

• Schmuels (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dov Schperling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I have re-edited the text, and added many relevant sources. The pictures I uploaded were deleted but I don't understand why. I would like some help. Thank you--Schmuels (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Schmuels (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Nikki Gregoroff

• Flowervr (talk · contribs)

I've gone over and over and cannot find why it is being rejected. I've even looked at other sites that have same kind of info. Please help! Flowervr (talk) 14:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

The only reference you have included is a link to the singer's own website. On that basis alone the submission instantly fails the notability criteria at WP:ANYBIO. Please read the notability criteria for singers at WP:MUSICBIO to see if the person you are writing about meets those criteria. If they do, please add links to reliable sources to evidence those facts (not the singers own website). See WP:INTREF for help on adding references. If they do not meet any of those criteria, then this person is not notable enough for Wikipedia. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:12, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kristine Cecille Isidro

Rg allstar (talk) 14:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC) I just want to know the reasons why my article submission has been rejected. I cited several sites for references and put in all the necessary information in the article, is there something wrong with it?

You need to explain more clearly why she is notable according to standard defined at WP:NGYMNASTICS. What medals has she won, at what events? You need to WP:CITE these claims to relieble sources. You also need to provide some reliable sources for her biographical information (such as her date of birth) in order for the submission to comply with Wikipedia's biography of living persons policy. I have looked at the three sources you have listed in the submission and frankly I am none-the-wiser for having read them. They are spectacularly uninformative. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

In particular, you need to document the awards. We cannot know yet whether she will actually compete in the 2014 Olympics--if she does, it will be much easier to write an article. Additionally, the writing uses unsupported puffery. You cannot say things like "all of Isidro 's routines were designed with high difficulties and her music was selected to bring out her uniqueness." without a third party published source. (Don't all gymnasts at her level design difficult routines and select appropriate music?.) DGG ( talk ) 00:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Ricky Aramendi

Accepted move to Ricky Aramendi as a article 86.15.162.137 (talk), 17:50, June 6, 2014 (UTC)

 Done Bellerophon _{talk to me} 18:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Tablethree/sandbox

Draft: Nayda Collazo-Llorens Just wondering why my references didn't show up once I pressed "Save"? I have done them in html (as I've edited other pages) with <ref>followed by</ref>.Tablethree (talk) 20:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done Issue appears to be resolved. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

June 7

04:24:05, 7 June 2014 review of submission by 208.101.167.65

• 208.101.167.65 (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

208.101.167.65 (talk) 04:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC) MALIFICA

• I'm sorry, this post is the only edit for your IP and you've not told us where your draft is, so we have no way of helping you. Can you tell us where your draft is?

06:52:55, 7 June 2014 review of submission by Sucheta Raikar

• Sucheta Raikar (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mukesh Chhabra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am not sure how to proceed further. I have have provided genuine references but yet I am asked to provide more. Do I shift the external sources to the references to make the article more credible.

Sucheta Raikar (talk) 06:52, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Kind of. IMDB is not a reliable source. Times of India is very much a reliable source, even in their "blogs" section, when they have a title that explicitly talks about the person. Try reading WP:REFB again. But to me it seems likely that the person is notable, and that just the layout and perhaps some extra sources needs more work. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:47, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

to extend this good advice a little, the need is to show that his work has been noticed as notable directing on notable films. It's not enough that the films be notable--his directing must be specifically discussed by the sources also. It should be possible to show this if you use the material--and use it not just in general referencesi n the endf, but as references to specific points in the article. DGG ( talk ) 03:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

16:01:01, 7 June 2014 review of submission by Embar1

• Embar1 (talk · contribs)

Would like to include Bio of Pete Uebelacker that is linked from American Motorcycle Hall of Fame Inductees. Most of the other inductees have bios included. Embar1 (talk) 16:01, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Embar1, the issue is that you've provided no WP:Sourcing whatsoever, so a reader has no idea where to verify these facts. While you can probably use the AMHF site to cite a fact or two (do not simply copy-paste their bio, that would be a copyright violation), we still need a wider body of coverage. Can you find verification of facts about him and his career in motorcycle magazines, books of racing history, etc? If so, please footnote them in. See WP:Referencing for beginners. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

These all look like they could be used as sources: — Brianhe (talk) 00:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Looking Back: Posts best time of day late in race; Class B title taken by Sutter, Muskegon Chronicle
• Motorcycle Hall of Fame
• Motorcycle Illustrated, 1921

18:34:34, 7 June 2014 review of submission by Ecubee

• Ecubee (talk · contribs)

Ecubee (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Ecubee: Your submission has only one independent, reliable source. Further, your subject fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:GNG. Please read all those guidelines before proceeding. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

18:52:51, 7 June 2014 review of submission by Svarshavsky

• Svarshavsky (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sergei Varshavsky (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am confused regarding why my article has been rejected on June 7. There is a comment that because of the lack of independent sources (probablu this is from May 28 and it has been resolved), and another one that because of incorrect use of citation. Which one is actual and what would you recommend me to do? Thank you. Sergei Svarshavsky (talk) 18:52, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Svarshavsky: The latest comments are the ones you should be most concerned about. Too many of your sources are from the subject himself, therefore not independent. Please read WP:RS and WP:42. On another point, I recommend removing all Russian words from the text of the article as it's both unnecessary and confusing. The sources can remain in Russian but I'm not so certain we need Cyrillic translations of so much Latin text. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Jaroslav Balcar

Accepted move to Jaroslav Balcar as a Olympic ski jumper article 86.15.162.137 (86.15.162.137|talk), 19:03, 7 June 2014 (UTC) Accepted i'm sorry i put his older brother dead is wrong i did not ment to and made a mistake. Please move this article into space to Jaroslav Balcar, Jodi. a. schneider 86.15.162.137 (talk), 19:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Please stop using the {{accepted}} template, if you have not actually accepted something (which you are technically unable to do as an IP editor). It is confusing for others. I have moved the article to mainspace. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 09:43, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

23:45:16, 7 June 2014 review of submission by FeatherPluma

• FeatherPluma (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The ACE Study (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dudes, what gives with advancing Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The ACE Study to mainspace? I've tweaked this AfC submission and I judge it good for advancement to mainspace. However, the advancement template isn't working for me for this draft. Can you help, please? Oh, and the article should be renamed to "Adverse Childhood Experiences (study)", right, and should be affiliated to the Medicine and Psychology wikiprojects. Please put some wind behind the sails on this one. Ta muchly. FeatherPluma (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

FeatherPluma (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• This is a first time I've seen this...

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The ACE Study is fully move protected and an administrator is needed to accept and move the page to article space if they see fit. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 00:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I have unprotected the draft. It was moved to an inappropriate place by the original author, and when that move was reverted, the draft was protected to prevent a repetition. Accepted by FeatherPluma. Huon (talk) 01:00, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. FeatherPluma (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

06:10:57, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Setgoidgp

• Setgoidgp (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sanaka Educational Trust's Group of Institutions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Setgoidgp (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The draft is an egregious advertisement and probably deserves to be speedily deleted per WP:CSD#G11. However, it is just possible that there is a notable basic subject underneath all that. If you've come here for advice on how to proceed, my advice would be to delete everything you have written so and start again, after having read WP:FIRST (and probably WP:NPOV, WP:N, and WP:RS). Bellerophon _{talk to me} 10:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

10:19:15, 8 June 2014 review of submission by M.jesionek

• M.jesionek (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Israel Jacob Kligler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

We had the following text:

<ref>Kligler’s letters, collection Dani Kligler – Kligler’s grandson</ref>

This was removed. In our scientific field we are able to add a "personal communication" as a reference.

Our question is - is there a mechanism to add a personal communication ?

M.jesionek (talk) 10:19, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no, Wikipedia does not accept private correspondence as a reliable source. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

10:25:46, 8 June 2014 review of submission by M.jesionek

• M.jesionek (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Israel Jacob Kligler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

sorry second try, we assumed all tags would have been effectively wrapped in a html equivalent of pre

Our query was

We had the following text as a reference

 "Kligler’s letters, collection Dani Kligler – Kligler’s grandson"

This was removed. In our scientific field we are able to add a "personal communication" as a reference.

Our question is - is there a mechanism to add a personal communication ?

M.jesionek (talk) 10:25, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@M.jesionek: This help desk is for pending drafts. Your article was already approved. I've answered you on the article's talk page. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:15, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

11:13:12, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Sucheta Raikar

• Sucheta Raikar (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mukesh Chhabra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The motivation behind my submission is a sincere feeling, as an avid film goer and student of cinema, that there should be a Wikipedia entry for a maverick Casting director like Mukesh Chhabra who has revolutionized the casting industry in India with his democratic and unconventional methods of casting. In the near future, He's likely to win several awards and accolades that would make the world look up and take notice. Casting for ages was considered a small and inconsequential cog in the large wheel of film making as the HBO documentary Casting By highlighted. But back home in India, it even lacks the basic professionalism that Hollywood follows. And hence the criticality of what Mukesh has done.

I think, given my several attempts in meeting the Wikipedia policies for submissions. it's clear that I need expert help to make the article worthy of inclusion. Please help me in this endeavour.

Regards Sucheta

Sucheta Raikar (talk) 11:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Sucheta Raikar: You may be unaware of WP:Mentoring. This ought to provide the help you seek. Fiddle Faddle 15:17, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Accepted Surprisingly, Chhabra has been interviewed quite extensively in Indian media. I have neutral-ified the prose and tidied it into the mainspace. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 23:08, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

11:48:43, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Frinked.tpm

• Frinked.tpm (talk · contribs)
  • User:Frinked.tpm/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Frinked.tpm (talk) 11:48, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

HOW TO MAKE MY OWN PAGE

Frinked, please see Wikipedia:Writing your first article. If you have general questions about starting, after reading the "First" article, you can visit WP:Teahouse to get expert advice. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

12:49:20, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Mcorderoy

• Mcorderoy (talk · contribs)

Can this be removed, T. Corderoy is an author (with a page on wikipedia), and this page re-directs searches away? Thanks Mcorderoy (talk) 12:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I've done this, which may achieve what you want. Note that search engines may (or may not) take a few days to catch up. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

15:01:48, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Cincao03

• Cincao03 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kelly Oubre (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Cincao03 15:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Cincao03, what is your question? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Kelly Oubre

My article has been declined, but its a good article. I have done every thing submiitrd it twice and declined can i have any help.Cincao03 15:04, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Cincao03: Your submission fails WP:NHSPHSATH, WP:NHOOPS, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:GNG. Please read all that material before you attempt to continue. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I read it all Chris Troutman (talk) there is nothin else i could do. You could get more info of him and fix yourself, i cant make it any better. Cincao03 18:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Cincao03: Well then, it won't get written. Try the reward board for help. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Native Son (American Band) article

Will you please help me, I do not know what I am doing wrong, I have edited and reedited my article so many times I am become discouraged... :(

poekneegurlPoekneegurl (talk) 16:47, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You've used very poor quality sources. As a rule, YouTube, Allmusic and other Wikipedia articles are no good for evidencing something's notability. Give us better sources, like books, newspaper articles, interviews in magazines etc. If no such sources exist, then the band may not be notable enough to be in Wikipedia. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 23:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

17:07:22, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Poekneegurl

• Poekneegurl (talk · contribs)

I am not sure what I am doing wrong, will you please help me with this article? I see something that needs correcting in red, that has something to do with "cite", but I don't know how to correct it, is that all that is holding up it being ok'd. If not please steer me in the right direction...all of the members of the band have their own PRIVATE WIKI PAGES...but not as their band Native Son...which they refer to in each of their .com pages or in the wiki articles that have been created for them.

WP:FANSITE

These guys got together in 2010 thru 2011 and worked as a cohesive unit many times, even touring clubs overseas. I use to work in the industry and have several friends in it, I have it on good word that they will be getting back together and are writing compositions together. I would like to get this article out, so when they do, and people hear their music, they will know who all of them are and the years of experience they have in the industry between them. Most are old men on their last leg and I think they need to be recognized for their many accomplishments in the business with a respect for who they are as Native Son ... they are all Son's of American soil and it should be known that they are, some of the World Known Musicians. I just need time to put up my references and build on the article, as well as giving others the opportunity to edit it, add to it and refine it with what THEY know about these four guys. Please take time to research them and you will see just WHO they are, this is not your "average" garage band... These are musicians who are in demand today...and a couple are philanthropist and help people and I want that known as well. People need to know that talented musicians, sometimes DON'T JUST PLAY MUSIC and give back in other ways. There are 2 of them that have consistently worked with David Foster, Quincy Jones Michael Jackson and only musicians that are greatly respected rise to that height in the business. I just feel they are to be acknowledged and their lives pointed to.

Thank you..

poekneegurlPoekneegurl (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Poekneegurl (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Poekneegurl: First, the articles about the individual members are poorly sourced and might be deleted themselves, so don't attempt to hang your hat on that. Second, your draft submission fails WP:NBAND and generally lacks reliable sources. Your emotional pleas indicate you're not being objective about this. Please also read WP:GNG and WP:42. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

20:53:16, 8 June 2014 review of submission by Maria.Rento IESF

• Maria.Rento IESF (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Abel Laureano (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I don't know what do to reflect the text's references on references bottom side. Can you help me, please? Thanks a lot. Maria.Rento IESF (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC) Maria.Rento IESF (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done Fixed, you had deleted the {{reflist}} at the bottom which causes footnotes to list themselves. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

00:32:00, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Johngosoeya3d

• Johngosoeya3d (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:John Go (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Johngosoeya3d (talk) 00:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

@Johngosoeya3d: Per WP:AUTO autobiographies are not allowed. Your submission has no sources. Your submission is in broken English, so you might be better off editing in Burmese-language Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

01:57:16, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Angelvgirl99

• Angelvgirl99 (talk · contribs)

Angelvgirl99 (talk) 01:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC) i am trying to find out why my wikipage was declined i put nothing but the truth in it and wanted to let others know about a great writer u can look her up on line and learn a little about her if youd like to i think that it would help get her noticed if i did set the page up

 Done Did you read the big pink boxes at top of Draft:Anne Marie Davidson, and the two hand-typed comments below those? If you read those, they very clearly explain why the draft was declined, and what you would have to do to fix that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

05:58:18, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Whitepimpin

• Whitepimpin (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Kief Brown is a grammy nominated song writer who is significant in the music industry. He is signed to a major label Atlantic Records, and to a major producer Kane Beatz. He sang and wrote the hook for "The Show Goes On" by Lupe Fiasco which went on to sell over 3 million copies in the United States alone. I do not know if the reviewer understands the music industry or business. Also keep in mind that Kief Browns real name is Jonathan Brown and he appears on several Wikipedia pages. This fact alone should make him relevant and would provide a link to the pages that already list him as a song writer. I have seen several pages on Wikipedia for producers and writers who do not have 1 major credit to thier names. I even wrote one. Please reference Cyber Sapp. He did one song for Gucci Mane " Freaky Gurl" and it charted 64 on billboard. He has no other significant credits. Kief Brown has a song writing credit on a song that charted in the top ten on Billboard and is verified triple platinum by the RIAA. I understand that my draft needs work, but I disagree with the editor saying that he is not relevant. Also one of the sources listed in the article is from BMI, which if the editor understood the music business he would know that BMI is the largest music rights organization in the U.S. The fact that BMI did an article on him points to the fact that he is relevant to the music business. Whitepimpin (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The draft in question is at Draft:Kief Brown. No editor has said that the person is not relevant. Incidentally, the BMI source you mention is not an independent source because Brown works for, or is promoted by, BMI. In addition, your draft claims that Kief Brown and "JR Get Money" are one and the same person, but the BMI source suggests this is not the case. This uncertainty will need to be resolved. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

06:10:21, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Microbilo

• Microbilo (talk · contribs)

Microbilo (talk) 06:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

My Article submission has been rejected twice and the raised issues has been resolved to the best of my ability. I have submitted it for a 3rd review by I need help from anyone that can edit it and make any further corrections they think that's necessary. All contributions are welcomed and appreaciated. Thanks for your helpMicrobilo (talk) 06:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The issue, although this has not been properly highlighted in previous reviews, is Smith's dubious notability. I have examined all 22 references listed in the draft and the only secondary source that lends him any significant coverage is the Poker-Nave source. All the others are either online picture collections in webzines and blogs, stuff he's published himself, his own website, agents websites and profile sites, or passing mentions of his name/photograph. In order to be eligible to have a Wikipedia article models must meet the criteria at WP:NMODEL or WP:ANYBIO. It seems you have tried to satisfy the previous reviews requests for better sources by increasing the number of sources with little thought to the quality of them. It probably should have been explained to you that what is needed is a smaller number of high quality independent sources, not a large number of trivial ones, that are closely connected with the subject. If such sources can't be found, you're probably wasting your time. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 10:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

06:56:53, June 9, 2014 request for review by Imkarthick

• Imkarthick (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

Your submission Draft:Drivespark was declined on 8 June 2014 by FoCuSandLeArN. It is not currently submitted for review. Visit the submission page to see the reasons for it being declined; click on the links in the decline reason for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 07:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

10:45:56, June 9, 2014 request for review by Mermaidartscentre

• Mermaidartscentre (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

I submitted content and have received a message saying that issues need to be resolved to clink on this link to edit the submission and this is here it brings me: Wikipedia does not have a talk page with this exact title. Before creating this page, please see Wikipedia:Subpages.

The message reads exactly this: Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mermaid County Wicklow Arts Centre. To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Please remember to link to the submission! You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Mermaidartscentre (talk) 10:45, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I've fixed the link in the message you received. The draft you were working on can be found at: Draft:Mermaid County Wicklow Arts Centre. Goto that page and click the 'edit' tab at the top of that page to make changes. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 10:55, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

12:18:00, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Global uty

• Global uty (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Murdoch University, Dubai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This article has a lot of values and a good addition to Wikipedia database. This article is about one of the well-established university in the United Arab Emirates, which is Murdoch University Dubai. The university is unique in its program offering related to the Media/business industry with a very well established start of art media and campus infrastructure facility. As a student I have experienced the hands of learning experience with the great studio facility which contributed my success to find my current position as a Multimedia Engineer in one of biggest television channel. I believe wiki should list such kind of educational institutions for the best interest of the parents and students who is looking out for media/business education with in Middle East & Africa’sn region. I am sure that inclusion of the said article would help many stake holders.

Global uty (talk) 12:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

12:54:16, 9 June 2014 review of submission by Philip Jones 1933-2008

• Philip Jones 1933-2008 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Philip Jones 1933-2008/Philip Jones (artist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I just tried to re-submit my article after someone got back to me said there was not enough referencing - I have edited it now ...how can I tell it it has been re-submitted properly?

Thank you

Louisa

Philip Jones 1933-2008 (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)