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
Scsbot (talk | contribs)
Bots
239,789 edits
edited by robot: archiving February 27
TrexR (talk | contribs)
48 edits
No edit summary
Line 385: Line 385:


= March 5 =
= March 5 =

08:58:44, 5 March 2015 review of submission by TrexR
{{Lafc|username=TrexR|ts=08:58:44, 5 March 2015|link=

<!-- [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here]] OR [[Draft:Your submission name here]] -->
}}

Hi,
I am requesting you to make me write an article on android one programmes phone spice dream uno as it will the phone users to get the current news about their phone, pleasde grant me permission.[[User:TrexR|TrexR]] ([[User talk:TrexR|talk]]) 08:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:58, 5 March 2015

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


February 27

02:41:36, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Jonathan lipworth


Hi, the article is named andrew robert korda and I'd like to change it to andrew korda - I can't see this in the edit options

This may seem like a very dumb question, but a friend helped me to start the page for the first round - so I am not sure if my name was used as the article creator - although the message says I am the creator

Is it possible to check this

Mant thanks

Jonathan


Jonathan lipworth (talk) 02:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathan lipworth: Hey Jonathan! I've moved your page to Andrew Korda– you can learn moar about moving by checking out WP:MOVE. Congrats on the article! -Newyorkadam (talk) 05:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

04:32:15, 27 February 2015 review of submission by RichLynPalm

My attempt to create a page for myself as a Literary Artist was declined. I am a living American Poet and writer, a fact that I can prove. If T.S. Eliot or hollywood people can have pages why can't I? RichLynPalm (talk) 04:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@RichLynPalm: Hi Richard– I'm the one who declined your article. I left the following comment: "We need moar information on Palmer. Please also add references from reliable sources that prove Palmer's notability and the correctness of this article." To expound on this, there are a few major issues with the article. First, there is hardly any information on you. We are only given your birthdate and a list of your works. We need much moar information on you; examples of this include childhood, career, what critics think of your work, etc. Another issue is that you are writing an article about yourself. While this isn't necessarily against Wikipedia's rules, it's generally advised against, as this can be seen as a conflict of interest, meaning that you will be biased toward yourself; bias is not allowed on Wikipedia. Please see this link for moar information on writing with a neutral point of view. Finally, according to Wikipedia's guidelines, not everyone should have their own article. If everyone got their own article, Wikipedia would be much harder to maintain and would have tons of problems with neutral points of view and other things. To fix this, Wikipedia has a guideline called notability; this determines whether or not someone is notable enough to be on Wikipedia. According to Wikipedia's guidelines on notability for authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals, the following criteria must be met for a person in that profession to have an article:
  1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
  2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
  3. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
  4. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
If you can prove these things in your article, it will be accepted. If you aren't sure if you pass one or moar of these rules, let me know and I'll try to help you. Please note that you must include references to prove what you write is true. Please respond here or leave a message on my talk page if you have any moar questions, and good luck! -Newyorkadam (talk) 05:34, 27 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

05:47:23, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Saruchey


Request on 06:11:48, 27 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 202.59.227.245


I tried to set up a page for my son Cameron Clark Rugby but it was not successful. Since then the Australian Rugby Union has started a page. Do I try to set up my original page or simply try to submit new material to the existing page.

Thanks


202.59.227.245 (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Clark3011 you are welcome to provide additional information for the Cameron Clark (rugby union) article, but as you have a conflict of interest due to being a close relative of the subject, it is not advisable for you to edit the article directly. Instead you should post the changes you want to the article's Talk page and remember to always include a published source that backs up the information - due to the verifiability policy we cannot accept personal knowledge or unpublished sources. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:41:31, 27 February 2015 review of submission by DmitryPopovRU


Hi Wikipedia Editors! Please have a look at this page and if you can please help work on it with the way its written please let me know! This has been deleted before but I think because it was worded incorrectly. The sources are notable and reliable! I mean they are from the biggest media outlets in NZ. I just need advise and an editors help!

Thank You! спасибо! --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 11:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DmitryPopovRU (talk) 11:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:46:31, 27 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Tsssr.prasad


BFF Metric has evolved as a by-product of our conversation on Visual Communication in Linkedin

(https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-Amount-Visual-Communication-can-4652376.S.5974746040958537730?view=&gid=4652376&type=member&item=5974746040958537730#commentID_null)

I need the definition of this QA Metric to be available to the general public thru Wiki.

Please help me in this process

Tsssr.prasad (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conversations on LinkedIn are not reliable sources except in very exceptional circumstances. If no independent reliable sources have discussed this metric, then it is not yet appropriate for there to be an article about it in Wikipedia. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:04:28, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Habatchii


Thank you for your consideration. The topic article 'False production' has been deemed inadmissible for inclusion on the basis that it was stated as not having a substantial social definition. Yet, the topic has been cited by administrative and judicial bodies on a global scale and proportion. Argument in favor of inclusion is supported by notable usage, of which ends and social acceptance justifies its means of definition.

With respect for the staff of Wikipedia, a general quiry of reference may substantiate viability of inclusion. The support of legal notes, citations, codification and other official processes may also not be admissible by Wikipedia standards, due to the nature of administration in which they are used in legal settings. I am by no means stating Wikipedia should expand its definition of neologism to include the omission of legal processes. The topic of legal situations in general should be under a separate custodianship that the legal community may research its content for viability and authoritative referencing.

Accordingly, hundreds of thousands of instances on the topic of false production can be inquried over the world wide web; including news articles, books, court hearings and pictures. Wikipedia's stance on substantiating a foundation of definitive references should be waived in 'special circumstances of public and social importance or significance'; as in the case of such a working phrase as 'false production'. I am in open dialogue with the Smithsonian Institute and the United States Library of Congress to more thoroughly reference this topic and its matriculation within governmental, corporate and institutional systems. I do strongly encourage the staff of Wikipedia to redact its position on legal neologism entries into the encyclopedia and include a well structured article on the positive and negative perspectives of the false production article.

Thank you again in advance for your swift and professional response. Habatchii (talk) 13:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The books and news articles would be the best sources to concentrate on. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:41:44, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Steven Paul Fisher


Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had an article in Sandbox rejected because it does not have footnotes. I have had a number of previous entriesl accepted without footnotes and wondered why I need them for this one.

Steven Paul Fisher Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This may have been a mistake on the part of the reviewer... Roeder is long dead, and Wikipedia:MINREF would therefore appear not to apply. Pinging @CraigyDavi: for information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I was wrong to presume that WP:MINREF applied to this article. However, after a second look, what I think needs doing is adding the references to the places in the text where they correspond to rather than a mass of them at the bottom. —CraigyDavi (T∙C∙@) 20:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:43:31, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Anthony Bradbury

Anthony Bradbury (talk)


The submitted articles Draft:Soft Robotics has been rejected by and marked for speedy deletion. Unfortunately, numerous attempts to contact the reviewer Anthony Bradbury to clarify the issues were futile. He might be too busy. I am afraid, that the whole article might be deleted and the work of numerous people will be lost. The issue seems to be a copyright infringement, but we don't have access to the draft and therefore we can not delete the picture or get the missing copyright information. Also the link to rebuttal the decision does not work. It would be great if anyone could help to rectificy the issue.

Thank you. Kind regards, SirJamesHunt



SirJamesHunt (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a correct link to Anthony Bradbury's talk page: User talk:Anthony Bradbury.
The draft being deleted would have nothing to do with a copyright issue with an image on the page. An image file might be deleted separately if there were also a copyright issue with the image. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Arthur goes shopping (talk)

Dear Arthur, thanks a lot for the feedback, but Anthony Bradbury does not respond to our questions on his talk page. Trying to find some help, I ended up here on this page. I would like to help to solve the issue, but I don't know what I could/should do, since there is not information coming back from the reviewer. Any advice would be very, very much appreciated.


Thank you Arthur.

Kind regards, Helmut — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirJamesHunt (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion and request that the article content be emailed to you. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:10:08, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Pranaz2014

The username is Pranaz2014. I would like to edit the article and resubmit for acceptance. How can I improve my chances for acceptance. Pranaz2014 (talk) 21:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not think there is any chance of an article about that person being accepted, unless you can establish that they meet the requirements of Wikipedia:VRS, which may well not be possible. You would also need to avoid promotional language like "is a prime example of the type of public health professional needed in order to bring prevention to the forefront of America’s health outcomes". Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 28

03:13:48, 28 February 2015 review of submission by Alfhild-anthro

I recently had an article accepted on bassist Andy McKee. There is another Andy McKee who is a well-known guitar player who already has a Wikipedia page. How can I ensure that people who are looking for the bassist are redirected from the guitarist's page? Thank you Alfhild-anthro Alfhild-anthro (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Alfhild-anthro: Both pages have an appropriate hatnote linking to the other articles as well as to a disambiguation page. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:46:56, 28 February 2015 review of submission by Tbt chairman


Tbt chairman (talk) 11:46, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see any reason to delete my page from wikipedia because all the information that I provided is true and I have used some references like the link of University of Dhaka (the biggest university of Bangladesh), The Bangladesh Today (one of the leading newspaper of the country) where you will get my information. These two websites are more than enough to prove my identity because nobody can open that kind of website. Mr. Shamim is my personal assistant and I asked him to upload my profile in wikipedia, I did not know that I need to do it myself....Thanks..

@Tbt chairman: Firstly, that draft's sources did not in fact support the content, and they weren't the reliable independent sources we're looking for either. Secondly, your draft was a copy-paste of a previous (now deleted) version created by Mah.shamim, who is blocked for being only interested in promotional edits. He also violated the Terms of Use by not declaring that he's editing Wikipedia as part of his job. Your draft was deleted because it was considered a creation by a banned or blocked user (Mah.shamim) in violation of ban or block. And no, you do not need to "upload your profile" yourself. You may want to do so on LinkedIn; Wikipedia, however, is an encyclopedia, and writing an autobiography here is strongly discouraged because it's very difficult to maintain a neutral point of view when doing so. I'd call your draft a good example. Furthermore, we previously deleted articles about you no less than thrice; see this deletion discussion for a summary of the reasons. It appears you simply do not meet Wikipedia's standards of notability, and we should not have an article about you. Even if that assessment were incorrect, it would be much better to wait until someone not affiliated with you in any way decides on their own to write an encyclopedia article about you. Huon (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:38:48, 28 February 2015 review of submission by Hrdap


I have sent for review the draft Swedish Doctors for Human Rights [1]. It is a complete new text and I worked hard in sourcing the criteria to be assessed (32 references, mainly secondary sources). I wonder if I could get some feedback while it is possible to improve the article ¬– before the review takes place. I would greatly appreciate if you would have any opinion, or suggestion.

Also, as reference, I have random these other articles in Wikipedia listed in the same category “International Human Rights Organizations” and I could see that a) many HR-organizations start by highlighting the name of the founder – I wonder if that is really necessary or just advisable; b) Arguments for the organizations’ notability are not mentioned in most of the articles; there was only one organization listed in the category “International Human Rights Organizations” which has a focus on health-issues, "Physicians For Human Rights", based in the U.S. but apparently with no links to EU or Scandinavian countries.

Lastly, I wonder is it would be possible for an administrator or approved user to move the draft to main space after their own checking up, or if the review means that there is a special peer-review committee assessing the new articles?

These are the examples of articles mentioned above:

International Coalition to End Torture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advancing_Human_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Human_Values

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defend_International

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Defenders

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derechos_Human_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Rights] (this the only article I found in the sample, which it is tagged “This article relies too much on references to primary sources."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Human_Rights_Defence

Hrdap (talk) 17:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hrdap, this question have been address at the Teahouse where you posted a copy of it. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you, I saw it now. brgds./ hrdap Hrdap (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 1

Request on 07:45:40, 1 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Moviecareer


I have created article on "Hayley Faith Negrin" as she is the youngest Emmy award winner, plus she had a strong portfolio in Movie/Acting etc....Strongly thinks its worthy to be included in Wikipedia.

Moviecareer (talk) 07:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Moviecareer: Hi there, unfortunately Draft:Hayley Faith Negrin is unsuitable for Wikipedia at this time. This is because it seems clear that Hayley does not meet the criteria that apply to actors and entertainers for inclusion in Wikipedia. The criteria can be found at WP:NACTOR. Bellerophon talk to me 19:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:54:18, 1 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Shug1983


I've been asked to create a wikipedia page in english for Dr Luc Foisneau. It is being rejected because of insufficient citations - although it contains footnotes and a full bibliography. Can you tell me please what it is that needs a citation?

Shug1983 (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Shug1983: While Foisneau is probably notable enough for Wikipedia to have an article about him per WP:PROF, the draft is problematical for its lack of independent references, more than for the scarcity of its inline citations. We need to see him discussed/his achievements backed up by independent sources. Not sources written by him or closely connected to him. Also, the draft has a great many references to institutions and awards in the French vernacular which need clarifying, for example Sorbonne needs some more context. Be specific. There is also a lot of biographical information such as where he went to school and his date of birth which are not clearly backed up by the existing references. Biographical info needs citing to a reliable source or removing per WP:BLP. See WP:INTREF for an introduction to formatting citations and footnotes on Wikipedia. Bellerophon talk to me 20:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:06:27, 1 March 2015 review of submission by Jonathan lipworth


Please can you help with the comment about 'correct citation style' I was sure I had followed the instructions but must have missed something

Thanks Jonathan

Jonathan lipworth (talk) 23:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathan lipworth: I assume you are referring to Andrew Korda which is now in the mainspace. However, to answer your question the citation style you have used is a little 'bare', as most of the citations only include a URL and a title and publisher. It would help avoid link rot if you added more information to the citations such as the name of the author/editor of the source as well as publication and access dates. See WP:Citation templates for more details. Also, you need to add references to support the biographical information, or remove such information. Bellerophon talk to me 20:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:11:34, 1 March 2015 review of submission by Jonathan lipworth


Hi, the article I have been contributing to has 17 references - all of which are independent

The comments in the flag says it needs more citations for references but I have searched the entire web and this is all there are

I have seen some Wikipedia pages with 3 or 4 so am struggling to understand why the 17 is not enough

Also, it says the citation style does not follow the wikipedia guidelines - I am sure i followed the instructions but must have missed something

Many thanks for you help

Jonathan

Jonathan lipworth (talk) 23:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replied in the section above. Bellerophon talk to me 20:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2

02:20:47, 2 March 2015 review of submission by 76.184.71.16

Why was my draft not accepted?

76.184.71.16 (talk) 02:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is nothing in it that evidences why Snodgrass meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for people. For this type of article we need to see that Snodgrass has been discussed by others in independent reliable sources. Additionally, the tone of the draft is rather promotional thereby contravening our policy on neutral point of view, the body text contains an excessive amount of external links formatted as text and the huge list of publications is not appropriate. Bellerophon talk to me 20:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:25:59, 2 March 2015 review of submission by AEHGriffy


02:33:17, 2 March 2015 review of submission by AEHGriffy

I need help on my article submission, Article Draft: McCleary School District. I worked to make the piece neutral. Facts are verified by sources/references. I looked at other school district pages that are articles, and they don't seem to be a great deal different. Thank you for any help.

AEHGriffy (talk) 02:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Responded in the section below. Bellerophon talk to me 21:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:39:22, 2 March 2015 review of submission by AEHGriffy

I need help on my article submission. I worked to keep it neutral, and just facts with verifiable references/citations. I also examined other school districts with published pages and they often had less than this article. Help appreciated...

AEHGriffy (talk) 02:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AEHGriffy: This draft was about a PreK-8 school in McCleary, Washington called "McCleary School District", which is quite a confusing name really. Unfortunately, Wikipedia typically deletes or redirects articles about educational establishments below high-school/secondary education level per WP:OUTCOMES. In view of this, I have created a redirect at the title McCleary School District and redirected the draft page to the same target. Bellerophon talk to me 21:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The confusion may be that it is a one building school, which is also a district. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AEHGriffy (talk • contribs) 21:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

07:08:32, 2 March 2015 review of submission by Ripcurlkim


Ripcurlkim (talk) 07:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Hi there, I would like to check if it is possible to have more than one article for creation pending at any one time? ie. if I submitted two articles for creation, does it mean that my first article was not saved?[reply]

@Ripcurlkim: If you overwrote your submitted draft with a new article, then only the current copy has been submitted for review. You can create as many separate sandboxes as you want (for example, you could go to User:Ripcurlkim/Smartkarma and create your draft there), or you can create as many new draft pages as you want using the Wikipedia:Article wizard. I moved your two drafts to Draft:SKX and Draft:Smartkarma. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:30:39, 2 March 2015 review of submission by Danreddy


Danreddy (talk) 13:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC) I submitted an article for review that I drafted in my sandbox. It needs to be linked to an existing page element. I don't know how to link to an existing element. I added a link from my draft page to the main page that exists already (The Open Group)but I don't know how to link to a list element from the list of Forums on that page. Do I edit that Open Group page and link it to my sandbox?[reply]


I got a message about my submission (hadn't submitted any yet) so I am confused.

Dan

@Danreddy: I'm not sure what you mean by "linked to an existing page element". If you want to link to an existing article, just include the text in double square brackets (e.g. [[The Open Group]]). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:13:25, 2 March 2015 review of submission by Amyruth67

i have to create footnotes and the instructions seem quite for me to understand. i am currently printing out the directions on how to do so, now. can I work on it all in the sandbox? thank you for your help.Amyruth67 (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Amyruth67 (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Amyruth67: You can continue to work on the document at Draft:Kostya Kennedy. It won't be reviewed again until you are ready to submit it, and any mistakes you make are easy to undo using the "History" tab, so feel free to experiment. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:26:13, 2 March 2015 review of draft by NewJerseyLenape


I followed the instructions for adding a new page. It sent me to a site that said the piece was a draft and could not be reviewed for submission.


NewJerseyLenape (talk) 20:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NewJerseyLenape: It didn't say that it could not be reviewed, it said that it was "not currently submitted for review". Click on the green "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" button and follow the instructions to submit it. However, if you submit your draft, it will likely be rejected as it appears to have been copied and pasted from http://gnadenhutten.tripod.com/bethelindiantown/id23.html. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:25:26, 2 March 2015 review of submission by Pierre Kawak


Hello, I am new to this. This is my first article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghaleb_Husseini can anyone give me advice and help me by editing :) Pierre Kawak (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pierre Kawak: Hi Pierre, welcome to Wikipedia! Good news... Ghaleb Husseini looks notable enough for Wikpeida to have an article on him. Unfortunately, it appears that you have closely copied text from somewhere else on the internet that is subject to copyright protection. You'll need to rewrite the sections of the draft below the copyright tag which I have placed on the draft. You can edit the draft normally, you will find the text concerned directly underneath the copyright tag once you put the draft in edit mode. Please don't remove the copyright violation tag until you have rewritten the text in question in your own words. Feel free to leave a message at my user talk page once you have done, or if you need any more help. Bellerophon talk to me 01:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


March 3

02:29:14, 3 March 2015 review of submission by 147.194.15.73


Hello, Sam

Here is a link that talks about his involvement in Rukh and its forerunner Prosvita, and the fact that he is the head editor of Zhuravlik : http://referatu.net.ua/referats/7569/175243/?page=1

Here is a link written on the occasion of his 75th birthday that talks about his scientific and academic achievements: http://www-nuclear.univer.kharkov.ua/russ/p10_4_92.htm

Here is a link that confirms his presence in the Rukh splinter party DPU, from when he ran for elections in 1998: http://www.cvk.gov.ua/pls/vd2002/WEBPROC3V?kodvib=1&kodkand=2027

Let me know if this is satisfactory

147.194.15.73 (talk) 02:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

05:58:40, 3 March 2015 review of submission by Debtang1019

Hey there, my article for submission got rejected. I'm not quite sure exactly the 'notability' and 'verifiability' of the links as I thought I've used secondary sources? Please let me know and help me in clarifying anything. Thanks! Debtang1019 (talk) 05:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Debtang1019 (talk) 05:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Debtang1019. I looked over your list of sources, and there is definitely a problem. Some are written directly by people in the company itself, including the conference talk descriptions. Most of those that aren't are small mentions of the company in an article about some other topic, for example "Joe Smith from Emerging Strategy said...". To show that this is a notable company, it will be necessary to find several extensive articles which are not press releases and which have been written by journalists, business analysts, or other professional authors in news reports, magazine articles, or books. Personal opinions on forums such as Glass Door and Storify are not considered publications. —Anne Delong (talk) 06:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:18:29, 3 March 2015 review of draft by Cliff.rigg


I have two questions: 1. My Lewis Hunton draft article requires a typo correcting in the title. Currently it reads "Lewis (also'Louis') Hunton" which is missing a space between the words 'also' and 'Louis' within the parentheses.

Could this missing space be added please so it reads "Lewis (also 'Louis') Hunton"?

2. The same article uses images taken by, and with the full permission of, a colleague who has provided proof of permission by e-mail. How do I get this proof to you?

Thanks very much for helping me with these problems.

Best regards...Cliff Rigg

Cliff.rigg (talk) 12:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Cliff.rigg: 1. "Lewis (also 'Louis') Hunton" doesn't meet the article title guidelines. I have moved the article to Draft:Lewis Hunton, and if it is approved a redirect can be created from Louis Hunton→Lewis Hunton. 2. It's usually best to wait until the article is approved before adding images (especially ones with more complicated copyright situations), but you can get more information of sending permission at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:45:53, 3 March 2015 review of submission by Gript0n

Following an initial review last week, the Venn Digital page was deemed to require more citations in order to show notability. I have since made edits to the text and added additional references to support claims/add more value.

While I wait for a review, I'd like an opinion on the current state of the page and any specific improvements I could make. Any takers?

Thanks in advance! Gript0n (talk) 16:45, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:54:58, 3 March 2015 review of submission by Polar teddy

Dear Wikipedia editors, I have submitted my first article about HighChem company, but it has been declined because it "appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". Would you be so kind and help me which parts need to be rewriten in this article? Thank you in advance for your time. Polar teddy (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:44:03, 3 March 2015 review of submission by 162.17.204.97


162.17.204.97 (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:49:44, 3 March 2015 review of draft by Davidgute


Hello, I've finished this article and would like to "release" it (to "publish" it), how do I do it? Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Fishelov Davidgute (talk) 20:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 4

07:03:55, 4 March 2015 review of submission by AEHGriffy


AEHGriffy (talk) 07:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC) I still have questions....the article was redirected, with this response: @AEHGriffy: This draft was about a PreK-8 school in McCleary, Washington called "McCleary School District", which is quite a confusing name really. Unfortunately, Wikipedia typically deletes or redirects articles about educational establishments below high-school/secondary education level per WP:OUTCOMES. In view of this, I have created a redirect at the title McCleary School District and redirected the draft page to the same target. Bellerophon talk to me 21:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)"[reply]

However, the school is a one building school district. I know that there are other K-8 school districts with Wikipedia pages. Here is one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_School_District

I would prefer to fix the article and have our own page, rather than the re-direct to the City page. Thank you!

09:04:56, 4 March 2015 review of submission by 213.55.73.40


213.55.73.40 (talk) 09:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is written too casually with a promotional tone. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:40:42, 4 March 2015 review of submission by Sumethg


Hi, I'm authorized to use content of W. Patrick Murphy from his linkedin (https://www.linkedin.com/pub/w-patrick-murphy/62/982/8a1) as I'm one of his staff. What can I do to have this page approved and published on wikipedia ? Please help.

Many thanks.

Sumeth

Sumethg (talk) 09:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Sumethg: In the vast majority of cases, we do not accept material from LinkedIn or similar social networking sites. This is because Wikipedia requires independent, reliable sources of information; these are things like newspapers, magazines, and books (unconnected to him). If he has not been discussed in those sources, then he cannot have a page on Wikipedia. Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:46:06, 4 March 2015 review of draft by MozzazzoM


I am creating a new page Draft:Portal: Tuvalu

several boxes do not have the header and footer - I cannot work out what is the fault MozzazzoM (talk) 11:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


MozzazzoM (talk) 11:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:55:14, 4 March 2015 review of submission by Trippcocreative


Hello, the page I was submitting for Intoximeters got denied, so I just want to know what specific areas I should adjust to make it acceptable. Thanks! Trippcocreative (talk) 15:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:57:49, 4 March 2015 review of submission by SusanG17


I have submitted my article twice (Sports-based youth development) with no success and a lot of confusion as to why. After the first edit, I removed as much transitioning/essay-like language as I could. I'm hoping for some guidance on what is a "peacock" term (specifically in my article) and how to make it more encyclopedic. The advice keeps suggesting I use independent or even secondary (as opposed to primary??) sources - there are many independent high-quality sources used in the article and correctly cited. I mentioned existing negative evidence and the benefits of sports but there isn't much evidence about the negatives of SBYD because the topic is generally one that isn't terribly controversial so not a lot of negative evidence is published. Would taking out some of the research about the benefits of sports help the article sound more neutral? What else can I do to make this more neutral? Thanks.

SusanG17 (talk) 16:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SusanG17 The referencing is rather thin, there are even entire paragraphs that have no cites at all. The word "should" is a major red flag for neutrality, it appears rather often in the draft. Wikipedia articles only describe, they are not allowed to prescribe or promote. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:36, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:36:55, 4 March 2015 review of submission by Scrape666

My article keeps getting rejected owing to the references. The problem is that the only sources available are the sources I listed. My article relies on local metal websites announcing meet and greet dates. If I cite each individual posting for each date I will end up citing about 100 or more postings on a few different websites. What should I do? Scrape666 (talk) 21:36, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:08:00, 4 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 203.111.224.56

203.111.224.56 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)can an equilateral triangle be a right triangle?[reply]

@203.111.224.56: This is the help desk for help with the Articles for Creation process. General questions like that should be directed to the Reference desk (but no, an equilateral triangle has three 60° angles, while a right triangle needs to have one 90° angle). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 5

08:58:44, 5 March 2015 review of submission by TrexR


Hi, I am requesting you to make me write an article on android one programmes phone spice dream uno as it will the phone users to get the current news about their phone, pleasde grant me permission.TrexR (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=649965988"