Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 312: Line 312:


[[User:Amira AbdelMoneim|Amira AbdelMoneim]] ([[User talk:Amira AbdelMoneim|talk]]) 07:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
[[User:Amira AbdelMoneim|Amira AbdelMoneim]] ([[User talk:Amira AbdelMoneim|talk]]) 07:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

== Murarka College, Sultanganj ==




[[Facebook|facebook.com/mclgsgginfo]] [[Murarka College,Sultanganj|www.murarkacollege.org]]

Revision as of 08:16, 6 August 2014

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • 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.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


July 31

06:13:40, 31 July 2014 review of draft by Appiness-wiki


The article I have submitted is not yet reviewed. Kindly help me out the reason why its not get reviewed. Appiness-wiki (talk) 06:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. You submitted it yesterday. There is a queue. Everyone here is a volunteer, and reviews articles when they can and when they feel they have the skill to do so. Please continue to improve your draft until such time as a reviewer accepts it or declines it with suggestions for further work. Fiddle Faddle 07:24, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

08:06:41, 31 July 2014 review of submission by Kotekhutsishvili


I've submitted new page and it was rejected. Can you tell me why was it declined? Kotekhutsishvili (talk) 08:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One reason for it being declined is contained in the pink box at the top of the draft page itself, Draft:Asseco Georgia. You can read more by clicking the links there.
Another reason for it being declined is that it is overtly promotional, with phrases like "Our software is based on a multi-decade sectoral experience". That sort of language is suitable for putting on the company's own website - it is not suitable for an encyclopedia article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11:41:49, 31 July 2014 review of submission by 192.116.95.66


11:41:49, 31 July 2014 request for review by 192.116.95.66 Transparent: Why you don't put the vulume I put about Gali Timen? She has a vulume on Wiki in another language.

192.116.95.66 (talk) 11:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@192.116.95.66: This is not the location to submit your request. Go to WP:RA to request an article about artist Gali Timen. Also try Wikiproject Israel. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18:24:21, 31 July 2014 review of submission by 193.140.194.190


193.140.194.190 (talk) 18:24, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hi this is really archaic, and I am sure once you learn this system it becomes second nature, but at this point it seems a throwback to my programming days. My submission was rejected...without any indication how I can make edits so that it is accepted. I am trying to get a wikipage on my colleague Dave Baldrdige. Mario Garrett

We can't give you any advice if we have no idea what page you are referring to - the IP you used to post the above has no record of working on a draft article. The only page on Wikipedia that a search shows a mention of Dave Baldrdige is this one right here (BTW are you certain the spelling is correct?). Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again this is an archaic method to edit a submission. Why not email me? How do I know I have to refer to my submission (this is the only submission I made.) Why does it have to be so public? I could use some help but the system (wikipedia) expects a sharp learning curve. Reinventing the wheel. Why not have the submission as a blog and then when the piece is ready for publication for the editors to publish it. They can send comments by email. Zip learning curve. I understand all of this volunteered time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.140.194.189 (talk) 15:04, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:47, 31 July 2014 review of submission by Emiskew


I'm unclear on why our article on March Networks was rejected again. I have re-written it to cite independent third-party sources, as was suggested by the first editor. The sources I'm using are cited on several other published Wikipedia entries, so they were found by an editor to be reliable. The last editor of our submission mentions in his comments that he didn't even thoroughly review all the sources - but he still rejected our submission? Can someone please help?

Emiskew (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I had no need to examine all the references. Those I sampled were insufficient in my opinion, and thus I declined your draft. The thing is, we want to accept drafts, but you need to make our job easy by doing the things required. Our objective is that your draft, once accepted, is unlikely to be proposed for any of the deletion processes. The submit. review, edit, resubmit process may be hard, but it;s a load easier than fighting against deletion. Please read the comments on the draft and take them on board. Fiddle Faddle 20:03, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please identify which sources are not reliable? As I said, many of my sources are listed in other approved & published Wikipedia entries. It would help me in updating my submission.

Emiskew (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Emiskew: I have flagged several in the article. You have used regurgitated PR pieces, press releases and directory entries. These are almost always primary sources. While we may use primary sources we may only use then in very particular circumstances. These are not such circumstances. If such sources are used in other Wikipedia entries then they are not good enough there ether. If you read WP:RS you can work out quite easily what is and is not a reliable source.
You have no need to use a new heading each time you ask a question here. Please continue with the existing one if it has not been archived. I have removed the redundant section heading for you. Fiddle Faddle 22:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

21:55:29, 31 July 2014 request for review by Krosadino


Hi,

I was hired as an intern by a company, Barker Specialty, to do a project for a company that they work with, Bow Tie Cinemas. Bow Tie drafted a write-up of what they wanted to be featured on Wikipedia about their company, and it was my job to upload the write-up and to follow all of Wikipedia's required steps, legal obligations, and processes. However, the article which I submitted on June 7, 2014, detected copyrighted information, and I am unaware of what was copyrighted as I had properly cited all of the photographs and text. I need to recover this article so that the company can fix whatever was copyrighted as soon as possible, as my internship ended June 30, 2014. Is there any way that I can trace this article back? It took me a very long time to complete this project, and I feel as if it just vanished due to a copyright error that myself, my boss, and my co-workers are confused on. Please let me know. Thank you! Kelly Rosadino.

Krosadino (talk)

It is very unlikely that any material deemed to be a copyright violation will be refunded to you, but you can ask the admin who deleted it. [irony mode]What rotten luck for Bow Tie Cinemas and Barker Specialty that their paid for editorial was deleted[/irony mode]. We deprecate paid editing and conflicts of interest. Fiddle Faddle 22:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly Draft:Bow Tie Cinemas remains. The version previously was deleted thus: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Draft%3ABow+Tie+Cinemas. Note that, if the current version is also a copyvio it will not remain for long at all. Copyright violation is not lawful. Fiddle Faddle 22:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is a copyright violation of http://www.bowtiecinemas.com/about/ and has been proposed for speedy deletion as such. You don't need the original draft refunded since it appears you copied the whole thing? I will ask RHaworth to note this conversation as the deleting admin. He has access to the original, something I do not. He may take a different view from me, as he is entitled to. Fiddle Faddle 22:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

23:51:30, 31 July 2014 review of draft by Bookerrj


Is there a way I can see where my submission is on the queue for review? I want to verify that it will be reviewed.

Thank you.

Bookerrj (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page is correctly submitted for review, despite what it says at the top. There is no orderly queue for review, so there is no way to see "where" a page is in such a queue. People review pages in whatever order they prefer. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 1

10:32:02, 1 August 2014 review of draft by Researchersnight


Researchersnight (talk) 10:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like to know? Questions are traditional at help desks. I can confirm that your draft has been submitted for review yesterday. Please anticipate a short wait before review, and continue to improve your draft in the meantime. Fiddle Faddle 12:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15:16:55, 1 August 2014 review of submission by Thewaitingarea

I am just checking to make sure that this article has actually been submitted for review. There is a button that says, "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" but I thought I already submitted it. At the bottom, it is also listed under pending submissions. Thewaitingarea (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The entire text seems to be duplicated. Please look at it and remove material to leave only that which you wish to have reviewed. it is definitely submitted for review, but the duplication does not help the reviewer. Fiddle Faddle 12:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17:16:04, 1 August 2014 review of submission by Scarnold1962

I have submitted this page two times but not been accepted because my sources are not reliable. I am currently looking at a page for Kathryn R. Wall who has no greater references than the page I am attempting to publish yet her page was published. Do I have too much in my article? Scarnold1962 (talk) 17:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please never use any other article here as a precedent, especially if you are using it as a yardstick for referencing. WHat happens if we do that is that we get worse and worse and descend to idiocracy. Have you studied in detail the comment left by the reviewer way back in January? I am about to leave a comment there myself. There is work to be done. Go to it with a will! Fiddle Faddle 12:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18:12:58, 1 August 2014 review of draft by 2003:62:492C:36FD:21E7:E347:313E:5EDE


Just wondering how I submit a translation of an already existing article 2003:62:492C:36FD:21E7:E347:313E:5EDE (talk) 18:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no difference in such a submission from any other submission. Fiddle Faddle 15:21, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2

No For An Answer

In have been trying for moths to get this article accepted. I've written over 100 articles, and this one has the most citations and certainly is important to fill out the biography of Marc Blitzstein. I can;'t imagine why this wouldn't be readily acceptable. Please let me know. Bob. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjstern (talk • contribs) 00:09, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have done nothing since the last review back in March this year, when Hasteur declined it. The draft is Draft:No for an Answer. Have you engaged Hasteur in a conversation to determine what they feel is missing? I suggest it. Their advice is usually right on the button. Fiddle Faddle 11:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The reason as to why I don't think it's notable enough is in the text of the proposed submission... Although it was supposed to have a limited engagement, it ran for two additional Sundays. A theatre show that ran for only 3 weeks is not really indicative in my mind of enduring and substantial notability... Hasteur (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11:43:43, 2 August 2014 review of submission by FRANK RIGBY 7744


FRD0251 11:43, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FRANK_RIGBY_7744/Frank_Dee_Supermarkets

my first question is to ask how one creates a reference when the reference is not available on line as it pre interweb... my reference is a magazine article of which I have a hard copy of the original...

my next question is - i can confirm the existance of Frank Dee Supermarkets via the the Companies House database but how do i link to a site like this - please bear in mind my IT skills are very limited

Hi User:FRANK RIGBY 7744 - You can use {{Cite magazine}} to reference a magazine article. It has parameters for data such as; article title, author, date, magazine title, publisher, page, etc. Fill in as many of the items you can. If using the template proves difficult simply put the information between ref tags, just be sure to include sufficient information so that a reader can clearly identify and find the exact article. If the companies register database is the only proof you have that it exists, it is probably not sufficiently notable for an article anyway. If the magazine article is about the company you don't need to bother with citing the database. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:05, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:15, 2 August 2014 review of submission by Aron barbey


I thought I'd check to see if there are key issues to address concerning my revised "article for creation". It has come a long way since it's initial review +3 weeks ago and thought I'd also get your recommendations, thanks.

Aron barbey (talk) 11:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aron barbey (talk) 11:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:18, 2 August 2014 review of submission by Rudh.Ani

I wanted to know the reason for not considering my draft. The draft is about a college which is present near Bangalore. I have obeyed all the rules while writing it. Please reconsider my submission. Rudh.Ani (talk) 13:20, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please visit your draft and read the message for you there. Fiddle Faddle 13:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15:42:39, 2 August 2014 review of draft by 75.80.57.123


I am the managing editor for the journal AoB PLANTS and am attempting to set up a Wikipedia article. Response to my draft indicates copyright violation because I am re-using some text from the journal website. This material belongs solely to the journal being featured in the Wikipedia article. Will this be a problem?

75.80.57.123 (talk) 15:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please read and follow the instructions in Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Note also that external material often reads like an advert, and this will also get the draft rejected. Why do you think you need a Wikipedia article on your journal? Fiddle Faddle 16:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, while the articles in the journal may be "published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY), which conforms to the most widely accepted definition of open access." the web site you have copied states "Copyright © 2014 Annals of Botany Company" and thus may not be reproduced in WIkipedia without full permission by the copyright owner. Since you could be anyone at all and are simply IP 75.80.57.123 we cannot take your word for ownership of the copyright. Even if you create an account that will not do the trick either. I very much doubt this draft will survive much longer without the OTRS process being followed.
In its current form it will be rejected anyway on submission since it is effectively unrefefenced. We require references from significant coverage about the entity, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Fiddle Faddle 16:36, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:01, 2 August 2014 review of submission by Giukin



Hello! Could you please delete completely my article trial on Nelly Kaplan? I keep receiving messages about it, but unfortunately I don't have the time to write it the way you require it. I'm a university professor and can write in conformity with the MLA or Chicago styles. I don't have time to inset citation just to prove this is a compilation of data. A bibliographical article cannot be but a compilation of public data on an author. In addition, I had some data from my interviews with NK. I was told it was not good enough. I understand & I would like to definitively close this account. How can this be done?


Giukin (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts cannot be closed, I am afraid. It seems a shame that you are dropping this ball. Wikipedia ought to be a challenge you can embrace with ease. You must be able to work in our world in the way we expect, surely? You may like to read WP:ACADEME to start to learn about the differences between Wikipedia and your world. The article appears to be a list of information, not really an article at all. Perhaps cutting material out to leave that which can be cited would achieve acceptance. It seems to me that too many people have edited Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nelly Kaplan for your request for deletion to be able to be honoured in a simple manner. Fiddle Faddle 21:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO the draft should be accepted, not deleted. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


August 3

07:50:56, 3 August 2014 review of submission by Condemore


Condemore (talk) 07:50, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be producing a draft which says "carnage magaluf mamading" and that is all. WHat are you trying to do? Fiddle Faddle 13:42, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

08:12:45, 3 August 2014 review of draft by Cecile Gallina-Duret


I do not have specific references other than those no doubt kept somewhere in the archives of Vallourec or of Ensam where I sent his notes and research work found at home after his death. I am not sure it would fit into editing of Vallourec History Page. As I am new to this, your assistance would be much appreciated. Cécile Gallina-Duret 08:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

@Cecile Gallina-Duret: One of Wikipedia's key pillars is verifiability, so without sources your draft cannot be published. Also, you need to remove or rewrite the first couple sentences to focus on the subject, as WIkipedia articles don't start with a preface. Finally, your userpage is not to be used as a sandbox, so please remove that content. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

13:00:40, 3 August 2014 review of submission by Nupur2000



Hi Please consider my article for review and publish. Thankyou :) Nupur2000 (talk) 13:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined for reasons stated on the draft. Fiddle Faddle 13:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15:57:51, 3 August 2014 review of submission by Trancegenre

HI I'm trancegenre why did you deleted my new passage about IMAN ALIPOUR Trancegenre (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Trancegenre: The article you wrote was deleted because the subject is not notable. Your draft has been declined for similar reasons. Your draft has no sources so you haven't made a case for notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:IMAN ALIPOUR exists happily. Are you referring to something else? Fiddle Faddle 16:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see you are. Please work on the draft. Fiddle Faddle 16:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:02:47, 3 August 2014 review of submission by Nupur2000


Please my review my article once more. I have provided more links in ref to my article :)

@Nupur2000: no Declined Please don't re-submit until you have addressed every Wikipedia requirement. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:29, 3 August 2014 review of submission by 197.237.27.216

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Hello Sir. I am trying to make wiki for Aakash Dhaiya. All my info s are correct. Can you please guide me what else I need to put in the article so that it can get accepted . I am through the REQUIREMENTS as u said. But totally confused :( Thank you :)

You need to look at the advice given at the two reviews and either follow it or ask the reviewers to explain what they mean. Reading User:Timtrent/A good article may be of use to you. It has helped others. What we are looking for is an article that shows WP:N and meets WP:42.
What I suggest is that you spend some time reading, then work on your draft. Anything you do not understand or need advice on, please ask a specific question about that thing. Do not resubmit until you are sure it is good enough. Even then it may be declined. And that is ok. Just do the next thing you have been advised to do. The process is iterative until we can accept your draft, and we want to accept it. Fiddle Faddle 17:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:47:51, 3 August 2014 review of submission by CJBlevins


Hi. Thank you for your quick and speedy review. I am curious. I've read the help areas, and it says it was denied because it doesn't read like an autobiography/format. What makes it sound so commercial? If you could guide me on what specific elements stand out that would help better resolve these issues as quickly as possible for an approval, I'd really appreciate it. I'm trying to get it posted before I have to take a leave of absence due to a medical condition. Thank you for your attention. Oh..and I keep getting a "No Draft Specified" error. The draft page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Scott_Hosfeld Draft:Scott_Hosfeld Please tell me what I'm doing wrong! The learning curve for this is steep...whew.  :-)

CJBlevins C. J. Blevins (talk) 23:43, 3 Aug 2014 (UTC) C. J. Blevins (talk)

CJBlevins (talk) 19:47, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:47:51, 3 August 2014 request for review by CJBlevins

@CJBlevins: Phrases like "greatly sought after" and "Internationally acclaimed violist" aren't neutral, even if they are true. All of that wording has to be removed. I'd also like to point out that your draft relies heavily on AllMusic and Imdb, neither of which are reliable sources. To that end, you haven't made the case for the subject's notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

22:52:17, 3 August 2014 review of submission by Atowfiq


I submitted this work 3 weeks ago. Initially I was told that Wiki has 500 submissions and mine will take over a week. Then it keeps updating and increasing the number of submissions and required time. I don't understand why it would be like that. An article should be processed as submitted in a serial order. If you now have more than 2000 submissions, mine should still be at the top ...not at the bottom. So why I was told that mine will take over a month now. I don't understand the logic behind this. I would greatly appreciate if you can expedite my submission please. Atowfiq (talk) 22:52, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Atowfiq: no Declined This is a common misconception. Submissions are not addressed in order; reviews happen randomly. I declined your draft and explained my reasoning on the draft. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 4

06:37:36, 4 August 2014 review of submission by 2.31.69.156


Hello there,

Have resubmitted page Lauren Murphy White for review after editing the citations and references at bottom with footnotes. Is this enough?

Regards,

Louis

2.31.69.156 (talk) 06:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems not. You got the spirit right but not the detail. Fiddle Faddle 10:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:23:10, 4 August 2014 review of submission by Clairam


Hi Wiki Editors

I have re-submitted the article, thinking that I had rectified my mistakes as per the feedback from the first submission (namely, add more 3rd party references). My review of my 2nd edit didn't have any comments, so I'm not sure what is required to improve my article to a publish-worthy state. Please could you provide some guideline for me and I'm very eager to comply and get it approved.

I'd also like to add some pictures of the data centres, but apparently can't do this yet. Is there anyone I can request to add the pics to the page on my behalf?

Many thanks, clairam


Clairam (talk) 07:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I reviewed Draft:Teraco Data Environments today I would decline it. You have taken no action after the most recent review on 1 August, whcih provides substantial guidance in the box declining the draft, an area you need to read in addition to any comments, which are optional and are to be welcomed when they appear. Please also read WP:42. Fiddle Faddle 09:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:03:15, 4 August 2014 review of submission by Ajeethboaz


Ajeethboaz (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:06:55, 4 August 2014 review of submission by Ajeethboaz

Hello Wiki Editors I have edited the article based on the feedback from my first review and have published it. I still haven't received the feedback for my latest draft. Is it under review or should I do anything different to complete the process. Thank you. Ajeethboaz (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Had you not deleted the review history you would have seen a resubmit button. I have reinstated that history. Please do not remove it, and please press the resubmit button when you are ready to resubmit. The draft is not currently submitted for review. Fiddle Faddle 16:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Timetrent, Thank you very much for the swift reply. I have resubmitted the article for review. Really appreciate your help Thank you.Ajeethboaz (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

23:24:43, 4 August 2014 review of submission by CyndiVroom

Hi there, I am inquiring as to why my wiki article on Aaron Walz was rejected for publication. If you could please list the issues you found as I can correct as many as possible. Thank you. CyndiVroom (talk) 23:24, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a full comment on the draft. Have you read it? Fiddle Faddle 07:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 5

04:48:44, 5 August 2014 review of submission by Rocksalt1111


Have uploaded an image, but it is too big. How do I get to the uploaded image and alter it. The page I have loaded it to is Trueerp

Rocksalt1111 (talk) 04:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Far more important is to upload images with the correct licence. Your upload was deleted, as your talk page shows. Fiddle Faddle 07:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:12:11, 5 August 2014 review of submission by Rplinco

The Art of the Game (film)

My submission was denied. Curious why that is? Seems to fit the qualifications.. Thanks much. Rplinco (talk) 16:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that this is an imperfect review of an imperfect but improvable article. I will leave some comments on the draft for you. Fiddle Faddle 17:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked at WP:FILM for an experienced editor to give you some additional pointers. Do not wait for that to happen, but start already. WP:REFB is worth reading here. Fiddle Faddle 18:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:57, 5 August 2014 review of submission by Leilanifireclaytile


I can't seem to add my citations/references/links for more information&resources! Will this be easier once it is reviewed and approved or will the lack of sources hinder the process entirely? Thanks! Leilanifireclaytile (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The draft now resides at Draft:Fireclay Tile, but will need references. We require references from significant coverage about the entity, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. WHat are the problems you are having? Reading WP:REFB may solve them. If it does not please come back and ask a further question. No need to start a new section, just use this old one and add your question to it.
The draft will fail the review as it stands at present because both of lack of references and because it is written in a promotional style. Please cut, cut and then cut more text, leaving only neutral prose and making sure you have references in place. In addition it must pass WP:CORP Fiddle Faddle 19:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 6

05:48:02, 6 August 2014 review of submission by Wozamatod


I am looking for assistance in regard to this draft I have written. I am a new wikipedia editor, and I came to this site because I found out about this topic and wondered why it wasn't an article on the site. Almost all the sources are from old newspapers. I wanted to know whether I have cited the sources correctly, and the I wanted to set up a few redirects to this article, as there are several names that the article could be called.

thanks Wozamatod (talk) 05:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Wozamatod: I have started fixing the bare URLs using Reflinks so reviewers can more easily evaluate the sources. I think the subject will meet general notability. I recommend removing the trivia section and putting that content into appropriate prose sections. Redirects can be made once this submission is accepted so I wouldn't worry about that just yet. Chris Troutman (talk) 07:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:49:46, 6 August 2014 review of submission by Amira AbdelMoneim


Hello,

I created a new article and submitted it for review on July 19th. It's been almost 3 weeks and I haven't hard back from you?!! Is this normal?? I remember when I first submitted the article to be reviewed. It said that it should take up to 2 weeks?!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Center_for_Advanced_Materials

Amira AbdelMoneim (talk) 07:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murarka College, Sultanganj

facebook.com/mclgsgginfo www.murarkacollege.org

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=620065987"