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.
See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Articles are not compared to each other for apparent noteworthiness; the issue here is one of sources cited. The Devon Soltendieck cites three reliable third party sources : the Toronto Star, the Edmonton Journal, and the Ottawa Citizen. Your submission cites only one such source, the Montreal Gazette, and it is not third-party in this case. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with this article in my view. This magazine is published in Chapters and this is a reference to the company. What is the issue specifically? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WM324AHI (talk • contribs) 02:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Actually the article is not bad compared to many other. I'm not sure what the reviewer found when they checked your references, but I found that one was a "Page Not Found", one was a blank page, and the third was a blog, which is not considered a reliable source. The two bad links may be a simple fix, or maybe I have a problem.
I would like to ask why the reviewer is declining this article all the time. The subject/person is a notable musician, producer and tv personality for obvious reasons. The sources and published material about him are independent and reliable and his article in the german Wikipedia ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Rafat) is online for many years. Looking forward hearing from you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.53.33 (talk) 10:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright...just looking through your sources...they are definitely not independent and reliable. You've got multiple primary sources, plus a press release and other that don't really discuss Rafat in any detail. The stuff in "weblinks" isn't much better...more press releases, reliable sources, and brief mentions. I'm sorry, but you really don't have a single source that really stands out. :( NoleloverTalk·Contribs17:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi There, i received your answer. Thanks for that, but I would kindly ask you to check again on the sources and weblinks as they are definitely showing independent and reliable publications about the subject and discussing the person explicitly. However, we added 2 more independent published sources as marked. Maybe its not quite clear for you as most of it is in german language. For example IMDB (Internet Movie Data Base), the german , Aids Gala (this one especially, a whole independent article) Article are all independent publications about the person. Additional to that his work references are more of a proof and a reliable source of his work in international music business. It would be great if you can go through it once again and then accept it. Once again, the german Wikipedia Article (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Rafat) was also accepted and published already years ago. Looking forward hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.53.33 (talk) 12:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, I shall go through each one and explain them all. You currently have eight references and six external links, after I took out the duplicates.
Ref #1 is a primary source. It's probably reliable, as far at that goes, but since it is directly affiliated with Rafat is doesn't help to establish notability.
Ref #2 is also decently reliable, but there is absolutely no significant detail of Rafat. He is one name on a credit list, and that's all.
Ref #3 is an e-card. Yes, it has his name, and even a short bio, but that is not what we want to see as far as reliable sources go.
I'll briefly run through the external links. IMDb is user-submitted, and not considered reliable here on WP. The next two are just lists, with his name on them. The next two had one sentence or less on Rafat, and on the last (which might be another press release) I hit a paywall. Now do you understand what I meant when I said that none of your sources really stood out? I'm sorry, but that's still the case. Please read WP:VRS (it's extremely short) - can you find any sources that would fit that bill? NoleloverTalk·Contribs20:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, we just read your answer and we really all have to disagree with you. You have so many different sources and proofs now, why are you making it so complicated? come on... And your interpretations about Wikipedias WK VRS list is quite arguable.
Why are press releases from different typs of entertainment biz writers or music journalists not independent? IMDB is not only user-based, but is used by all major film, tv and media productions itself who list their cast and crew on the Internet Movie Data Base. You can not get into IMDB if its not reliable or if the topic which is listed hasn't been actually on air or published! Its not working like that. So, we really are interested what you would like to see as a source that "stands out" more?? Why is the official list of composers in Germany not reliable and independent? Why is all the information you have got in front of you from different tv shows, music productions, Producing credits, songwriting credits, press releases and your own accepted german Wikipedia article etc not reliable?? So, that makes no sense, right? And again, why is our subject/ person we are trying on now for the 7th time now already accepted and published in WIKIPEDIA the german version?? Could you please comment on that and explain what exactly your problem is......Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.53.33 (talk) 22:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so...
Firstly, if you have a problem with WP:VRS, go onto its talk page, not here.
As far as I can see, the press releases are from venues, companies, or representatives connected with him.
Actually, IMDB is largely user-submitted, thus we do not know if it is a reliable source. (It would be like citing Wikipedia itself as a source and calling it reliable)
Something that stands out would be an article or review from a completely independent (meaning no venues he's been at, or Fat Music London, or his representatives) reliable source (meaning no IMDB, Wikipedia, blogs, etc.). Stuff that could be in this category would be newspapers, magazines, web aggregrates (reliable ones), and so on.
Let me try to be as clear and un-complicated as possible. Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. For one reason or another, none of your sources fulfill those criteria. Other then that, A412 nails it, and I can back up his statement that the German Wikipedia doesn't matter here. If they have an article, great. That doesn't require us to have one here. Furthermore, if you can't understand how a press release is not independent, or what "significant coverage" means, then I really don't think we can help you. NoleloverTalk·Contribs01:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, wow!
we don't have a problem with WP:VRS, the thing is though that we clearly fulfill your criteria. Very simple.
Do you really think saying "Frankly, we don't care too much about what they do there" speaks very well for someone is who working at a free, open-minded and international Enclyclopedic Organisation who is run through donations? Are you serious?
Obviously your own opinion about how to see or interpret things is more important than the simple fact of published and proven material which is out in the WWW for everybody to see. EVEN IN YOUR OWN WEBSITE! Its not about you or how you see things but what actually is true and reliable. Its about whats notable and interesting for the public. If you don't believe or it still isnt clear to you yet then take a minute and google the name and subject we are trying to get an english version for. What about that?
Regarding your point 4: The press releases are exactly what you are asking us for: there are totally independent, because its clearly NOT generated either by the business or organization it is written about, or by a business or person hired by or affiliated with the organization. (nobody knows the writers or journalists), they were written and published independently because of the various happening tv shows, performances, involvements in music etc. They were written and published because our subject/ person is a known entertainment figure and was the host and producer of the shows we are citing or the composer of the biggest saturday night show in europe viewed by 10 million people. What is so difficult to understand about it and why isn't it independent to you? That still makes no sense.
The thing is: we are talking about an international music producer with a proven track record all over, who is widely responsible for a lot of famous artists to make money and to find alternative revenue streams in this difficult times of music business with unpaid downloads, copyright fraud etc through his companies brand entertainment and partnerships deals and you still are making our Article dependent on what you think is not quite fulfilling in some format.
Well, if the written above doesn't bother you we think it would be only fair if you show this article, our sources, references and our dialogs to your head of staff and to at least 5 of your collegues where at least one of them knows german language and can really check and see the reliability to get a independent and proper feedback from more then just yourself or one more colleague.
Hi. I was asked by Nolelover to give a second opinion, and I have to say I agree with those who have attempted to address this issue here. It's nothing to do with whether individual editors have any sympathy for your cause—they're just following established guidelines that have been established through consensus. We require independent sources for articles, because without them, Wikipedia risks becoming a directory for every person trying to get a publicity boost. Open up Wikipedia, and instead of some informative piece about the Meermin slave mutiny, you'd instead see hundreds of articles providing "information" about "up-and-coming" businesses and artists. That's not what we're here to do.
To address your point, press releases are not independent—of the two you cited, one is published by a PR agency and the other by the label who published Rafat's albums. Both are in some way connected to Rafat, so neither is independent. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not reliable. Anyone can edit Wikipedia articles, so they are not evidence of notability. You argue that Darius Rafat is an established and notable producer. To show that, you need to give us independent sources—we can't just rely on your word for it.
Basically, if you can find significant coverage in multiple sources that are unambiguously independent and reliable—newspaper articles and articles in music magazines are where people commonly look (I tried looking on Google and couldn't find much), then there would be no problem with using those sources to write an article. But what you have right now simply isn't enough, sorry. wctaiwan (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks wctaiwan. 176, I'm sorry you feel as you do. Seriously, I am. I've been trying to give you the best advice I can, because I do think that you have the foundation of a good article here. Unfortunately, I know from experience that if this was created, it would almost certainly be deleted at WP:Articles for deletion. I can't go get five more editors to look at this, but if you would like to go and ask some yourself to come here and look at this, that would be fine. I don't have a "head of staff" - we're all volunteers. If there's anything else I can do, let me know. NoleloverTalk·Contribs16:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to try and rewrite this article to end this argument. He might be notable, who knows? Anybody here at AFC read German, by the way?A412 (Talk • C) 19:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there,
alright, we totally appreciate and respect your feedback. Well, let us find us some more (hopefully) reliable sources for you to sort this out and maybe we then can end this dialogue and all be happy about the new english Wikipedia version of the already existing german article. If the mentioned re-written version of you fits well and is suitable, thats fine with us, even better. Best regards.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.53.33 (talk) 00:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
we now saw that the article was re-structured and rewritten by you and to us it looks great. We are happy with it.
Regarding these 2 little requested citations for his marriage and residence and his work being featured in different countries, they are no independent sources for that as this confidential information by his management we have contact to. But it quite clear that the information is true as we know it for sure and his official contact address is London. We are not able to provide you with his marriage certificate, but this a fact as well.
So, we are now looking forward that our article is going to be accepted and to be published.
Hi, we now saw that you again requested these citations:
to requested Citation 1: Regarding his stage debut at age ten, there is no published or written source about that. There is just one picture of it and we dont have access to it. That was 1987! We know it from his office. How can we give you a citations for that?
to requested citation 2: regarding the music exposure in different countries: Again, we can not provide you with the different broadcasters media plans for their On-Air performances. This is not public info, but reliable info from his office due to his various international clients.
to requested citation 3: Marriage and residence: How can we provide you with sources about that? We don't have them of course. We don't have his marriage certificate and residence card and why is this needed to be cited? How can you cite that somebody is married? Sometimes people marry totally private and unknown. But we know for sure that he is married and that he lives in London. Thats a fact. We found an entry in the residence registry of London, but we can not cite this and give out his private address to make it public due to privacy law.
So, we kindly ask you to take this for a word and and accept our article now.
Hi again, ok we dropped the statements and corrected the article. We hope its fine now.
The citation request for the sponsorship topic is already included and cited in citation Nr.6, which was published independly in a renowned professional magazine for advertising and marketing so that should be fine now as well.
We are now finally looking forward to your approval.
Thanks for all your hard work. If your article would have been accepted immediately, it could have been deleted the next day, then it would be even harder. Now that is not likely to happen. Thanks again. :- ) DCS23:50, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI: The person is indeed notable (the German Wikipedia is there a bit more restrictive in "accepting" and keeping articles - for an indicator next time) - but this draft/article lacks still independent sources... In our normal criteria I would have declined it since there are only press releases and primary sources included ;) mabdul08:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I recently wrote an article for Musician and Producer Rude Kid who is only recently becoming known. The text I used for the article was text that appears on his official facebook fan page, and seems to be the only accessible text available at present. As he is a relatively new name, there isnt too much information on him and I am struggling to find references to include. There are a few at the included links but not much else. Are there ways of still being able to publish this article on Wikipedia without having much available for referencing?
I don't know if you can upload videos at all (and almost certainly not the videos you're probably thinking of) but pictures are much easier. First of all, if you're trying to upload a picture of Pasieshvili it must be either a free picture (licensing-wise) or one that you took yourself. Is that the case? NoleloverTalk·Contribs16:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
More evident why it is published,
He is the grand son of K.K.Govindasamy, brother of K.K.Neelamaham, a well known D.K leader, freind of thandhai periyar Ramasamy.
Mr.K.G.Saminathan's political life history was written by Mr.K.Veeramani (D.K.Leader) on his book oliyum oliyum.
It's alright...you don't have to send it to us. However, you do need to provide reliable sources (like the book) in your submission, and right now you don't have any. NoleloverTalk·Contribs16:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I made all the suggestions from the reviewer. I also went to the talk page to get feedback and I made those changes. I have tried resubmitting the article for review, and it has not been re-reviewed. What am I doing wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janus57 (talk • contribs) 14:39, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am a busy spine surgeon
I am finding this system so antiquated.
I edited much of what I had entered on the site under foraminoplasty yet my amendments have been ignored
The system says enter 4 ~ to save the edits yet I entered these and the amendments have been ignored
Then you dare to say that my preparations will be removed if |I do not update within a week
Do you really want world leaders to submit on your site and why do you not make it easier to submit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Missurgeon (talk • contribs) 20:23, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand what you had a problem with. Are you saying that you attempted to edit your submission and it didn't save? Putting four tildes ("`") automatically places your signature there...its an easy way to tell who said what. Now, you may be a surgeon, but you still can't copy other's work. NoleloverTalk·Contribs20:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now I wonder if you will see this response:
Thank you so much for trying to help me
I am not copying anybodies work but my own
So to save my amendments I should insert Missurgeon (talk) 21:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC) my name 21:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC) but where do I put it?
How do I stop the page being dumped because I have not had time to go over it again within a week?
It seems a pity that all this work should be for nought
Why do you not have a SAVE button on the page like other software?
There is an entree paragraph which I want to improve upon but there is no edit button for this so how do amend this section?[reply]
Okay so-
No, you do not to sign ~~~~ on articles to save. However, at the bottom of the page there is a "Save page" button to save contributions.
To clarify, four tildes puts your signature (which for me is a red "Nolelover", a yellow "talk" and "contribs" and a datestamp). It doesn't affect whether the page saves at all. Your submission won't be deleted - the message is a bit confusing and I'm working with another editor right now to fix it. NoleloverTalk·Contribs22:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am sad and frustrated because yet another Wikipedia reviewer appears to believe Sam Hanna Bell is not noteworthy even though I've provided referenced evidence from reliable published third parties that a 'blue plaque' [see Wikipedia articles on blue plaques - they are erected to honour 'notable' people] was erected at the house where he wrote his masterpiece, they guy was awarded an MBE by the British govt and his work has received multiple plaudits and been made into a film. For goodness' sake.
I've put valuable time into trying to improve Wikipedia by seeing this gap and drafting this article but now I am nearly ready to drop it. It would be wasting everybody's time to keep robotically resubmitting this in hope of finding an intelligent reviewer. Is there no appeals process? Please help.
Marcos182 (talk) 21:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some of my references which are duplicates cited via the ref name tag are showing as duplicate references in my ref list (i.e. reference 2 & 10, which should be the same). I'm sure it's just a minor error in my coding but I can't see where.
I fixed the problem (you can see my work here). What had happened is that you had put in a name parameter, which isn't recognized by the system. I changed those to the ref name system which you had tried to use. Leave a note if there's anything else we can do for you :) NoleloverTalk·Contribs14:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bacardi 3 ltr bottle label.
Hi my name is Mr Robert Brent,l have a 3 ltr Bacardi bottle,it is over 30 years old,and l have it hanging on my home bar,it still has the old label on it,and l need a modern label to replace it as my old one is heavily stained,and it looks awfull,please can you send me the new labels for a 3 ltr bottle please,l dont mind paying for this please.
Hi,
The above article was rejected by a reviewer without any comment whatsoever. I am asked to improve it but no hint in which respect...
Could you help?
Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey69 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I made an account, but the word barf was in my name (BarferBoy), and they blocked it, so I made another. Is there a way to either unblock that or delete it? Also I submitted an article, but don't have much on it. Is there a way to submit it for other people to edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by T11ld3000 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Short of a signed affidavit from God I have no idea what you might consider reliable and notable sources: they are all there, quoted. We may sue the other band instead, for infringement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.210.72 (talk) 18:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
My article for the band Blood Ceremony has been rejected twice because I've failed to establish their notability, but I believe I have shown that the band meets at least three of Wikipedia's notability criteria:
1.Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1]
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:
Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3]
Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar) would generally be considered trivial but should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
- I have provided at least two articles from online publications that are independent and reliable (The Quietist and The Torontoist).
5.Has released two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable).
- The band has released two albums on Metal Blade Records, one of the premiere labels in heavy metal for the past 25-30 years.
7.Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
- The Torontoist calls the band "Toronto's most original band"
In addition to these, I have shown that the band has toured extensively with two of the most influential bands in the subgenre of doom metal (Electric Wizard and Ghost), and has been reviewed and interviewed on reputable online magazines.
Please help me understand what I need to do to get the article to pass Wikipedia's requirements. Thank you.
After filling in the references using Reflinks, I have moved the article into article space. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! --Bmusician04:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Ramirez
COULD YOU TELL ME WHY RICHARD RAMIREZ IS STILL ON DEATH ROW? HE EXHAUSTED HIS APPEALS IN 2006. WHAT IS THE HOLD UP? NO WONDER WE HAVE OVER POPULATED PRISONS. THEY KEEP THEM ALIVE AND WE AS TAX PAYERS PAY TO KEEP THEM THAT WAY.
DISGUSTING!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.76.195 (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has recently deleted a photo (Oliver_Publicity_Photo_2012a) that my company owns the copyright to. Please let me know what I need to do in order to have this photo added back to the Wiki Commons, and what I need to do in the future to avoid being incorrectly flagged
sir,
now i have added relevant reference to the articles and deleted not related items and also added some of the additional information which may help to publish this article
thank you
anaamikamathu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaamikamathu (talk • contribs) 04:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
hi.i created my article titled as "Kusumba" and i also submitted it for review, the reviewer told me to add references then i added references to it but it still not get accepted.Will u pls told me what the exact problem is?Also i want help about how to submit article for review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohan pardeshi1717 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article was moved (by me) to the Wikipedia's mainspace last month, so it has already been accepted and no longer in Articles for Creation. However, I left a message box at the top of the article suggesting more references are added, because currently there is quite a bit of unsourced information. It is very unlikely your article will be deleted, because it is a populated village that exists. All the same, other editors could possibly remove information that is unsourced and unverifiable.
Could you be so kind and tell me which parts of the article "reads like advertisement"(do you mean the links to the surgeons pages, or mentioning of charities projects), or is it too detailed? can you please help me out with this, because once i get a rejection because it is not notbale enough, now its too much of advertising. and nobody explains anything. It is a charity,for gods sake, in the end of the day, we do not sell anything, how much of an advertisement can it be. Can you please help me out with this, because its rather annoying.
Thankyou for your question. Unfortunately there is not a decline message that covers multiple issues, so I used the "reads like an advertisement" because it addressed the most pressing problem. Your article is largely an extensive report about Facing Africa's projects, including a comprehensive list of many medical operations carried out. It is almost entirely unsourced, therefore independently unverifiable. It reads to me like you are publishing a comprehensive profile of the charity, rather than a concise encyclopedia article.
The first and most important thing you need to do is establish that Facing Africa is suitable for a Wikipedia article, usually this means meeting the WP:GNG notability criteria, or the WP:NONPROFIT alternative criteria. This will mean the activities of the charity need to be independently verifiable in reliable sources. You have added inline citations (which is a great start, believe me) but these often verify other information not directly related to the charity's importance.
However, I have had a second look this morning. I see several of the links you have listed under "Press releases" are actually authoritative news articles in regional and national newspapers. Unfortunately I did not look closely at these because (a) press releases are normally not reliable sources, being self published (b) with over 300 outstanding articles we have limited time to review each submission. When I get a spare moment later today I will consider accepting your article, but bear in mind I (or another editor) may choose to remove any unsourced information from the article. Hope that clears up the misunderstanding! Sionk (talk) 12:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When I first started using Wikipedia I made an error with my username and so my article was blocked and redirected to another page. I created a brand new account after reading up on the Wikipedia rules and I have been trying to get my article reviewed and then put online but now you are telling me it already exists, but it doesn't it is redirected to another page. I have no idea where to find my article and how to stop the redirect. Help me please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippa Pointon (talk • contribs) 09:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the article, even the redirect already exists, you can edit the article in question; either by incorporating information into the eventual target article, or by editing the redirect directly. To do the latter, click on YuuWaa, and then, directly under the target article title, you'll see a line in small print that says "(redirected from YuuWaa)". click on "YuuWaa" in that phrase, and it will take you to the redirect page, which you can then edit to remove the redirect and replace it with a normal article.
All that said, your article as it stands is a press release, and is not suitable for an encyclopedia. I'm also concerned about notability. Mangoe (talk) 14:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well could you tell me what is wrong with my article. I have edited it 4 times and put in all the references that I have up to this date I don't know what else I can do. Please help me.. please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippa Pointon (talk • contribs) 14:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I have the right to do that, and also if I did every other product within Gemalto would want to be included on there and there are thousands. I just wanted to create a short page for users who are curious about YuuWaa where they can read about us, what YuuWaa is all about and our history. I don't want to sell anything I don't understand why it's so difficult and I can't seem to get any guidance to help me, i've never done this before so i'm a little in the dark. Is there anyone who can help me and tell me specifically the problems? All other cloud storage solutions have wikipedia pages so I think so should YuuWaa. Thanks for any help given from anyone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippa Pointon (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that's great, what should I do now? You think I still need to rewrite it as the last comment was it stands as a press release? Thanks for your help and your responses!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippa Pointon (talk • contribs) 15:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sir,
Please help me to develop the article because this article give some information about kodava language films this section will give information about the films which are very rarely producing
REGARDS
anaamikamathu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaamikamathu (talk • contribs) 10:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's always better to sort out the article first and make sure it is acceptable for Wikipedia, before uploading pictures with copyright issues. As you have found out, Wikipedia quickly deletes questionable photos that are not being used in a 'live' article. I suggest you make sure your basic article has been accepted before adding any 'bells and whistles', so to speak. Good luck! Sionk (talk) 12:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright
hello
I uploaded an image. got an error for problem with copyrights, although its an original image.
I want to resolve it before wikipedia deletes my work.
How can I do it?
Kimmeleshkolot (talk) 12:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An in-line reference appears as a small number (like this[1]) after the text. To insert them, use a <ref> tag at the beginning, insert your reference, and use a </ref> tag at the end. To make them show up, add a {{reflist}} template at the end of the page. If you need more help, see referencing for beginners. A412 (Talk • C) 15:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added three articles from video interviews that were done with Julia Cook by different news media outlets. They were using her as an expert in children's story books and how they can be used to help protect and further the social development of children. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Storybookcentral (talk • contribs) 16:04, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and thank you for helping me with this.
I recently submitted a biographical page on a legitimate artist. I'm currently completing a book on her public art commissions over the last 10 years, which will be published later this year. The article was rejected because it is derived from primary research, principally my interviews with the artist, and lacks outside citations.
I certainly understand and support the reasoning for this (though for art scholars, primary research is most highly respected!). Wikipedia doesn’t want every yahoo posting a page about themselves or their friends. On the other hand, I am a published author, and my work on this artist is what another author would cite as their source of information because I am, like it or no, the authority on her work. So it’s a bit of a catch.
Well, here the thing - even if your book was accepted (and without really looking at it I wouldn't know) you would need more then just that. If her work has been reviewed by reliable sources, then absolutely add those. That's exactly the kind of stuff we're looking for you to add. NoleloverTalk·Contribs18:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi!
I am the author of this article. Is my first article, and I am using the article for Woods Coffee as a quality reference. I'm very interested in including the table on the right of the screen that summarizes basic info, how is this made? I would also love to receive feedback on the progress of this draft as a whole.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninesies (talk • contribs) 19:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It probably is, but there aren't too many people working the backlog. (398 pending submissions currently) Somebody will get to it soon. A412 (Talk • C) 02:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My article on Auslogics BoostSpeed was declined due to it "sounding like an advertisement" and "insufficient sources". I would like to argue the latter, as there are 10 completely independent sources that are considered to be reliable authorities in the industry. How many more sources are needed??? As for it possibly sounding like an advertisement, any perceived praise for the subject is due to most mentions in independent sources being reviews giving the subject high marks and recommending it. I did try to keep my language as neutral as possible, but felt that I had to include all this information in the article to prove the subject's notability. I am in no way trying to promote this piece of software here, just trying to have a subject worthy of inclusion in WP get its own article. I would really appreciate any help from more experienced editors with rewriting the article to not sound like an advertisement, so it can be included in WP. Thank you very much in advance! TaraSwimms (talk) 03:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that the one thing that makes your article look like an ad is the "Product Components" section. We really frown upon those, especially when there's only one source and it's the company. Without that, I certainly wouldn't call it an advert. NoleloverTalk·Contribs15:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please help me to understand why my page has not been accepted. I've added references. I've looked at hundreds of wiki pages and there are tonnes that don't even have any references. What do you need specifically? What I have referenced are externally news stories and published books.. Please help.
Thank you.
Juliahuiemartin (talk) 04:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I wasn't being rude, I didn't say the other articles were "crap" I was just highlighting articles that I've seen where there are no references so didn't understand what was wrong with mine exactly, that's all. Ok, so I have the references but you said they are formatted incorrectly... How do I make this better? Thanks once again. Juliahuiemartin (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, you were not being "rude", but if the way I worded it seemed like I accused you of being rude, I apologize. The references are not correctly formatted in inline citations. If that policy page, and WP:REFB, are too difficult to understand, view this video tutorial. Here's a video tutorial - hit play, then right-click for "full screen". Best, Bmusician08:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes the policy page is too difficult to understand... the videos are awesome, but it stopped at part one.. I can't find part 2 whhich goes on to explain my predicament and instructions... can you please send me the second video.
Much appreciated :) (Juliahuiemartin (talk) 16:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)) Thank you![reply]
My article was declined two times, in December and January. The first time because of lack of reliable sources, the second time because of lack of notability. I rewrote the article and i think it will satisfy the demands. But before i re-submit the article i would very much appreciate some advise to make the article better and make my chances bigger that it will be accepted.--Joost26 (talk) 11:35, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm new to your submission system and probably made a lot of mistakes trying to upload the revised article for EXOC3L2.
Anyway, now I have revised the article, but I'm unsure if the revision has entered your system correctly, or if I have to upload it again.
Hello
I've been working on an article which is complete but but it is on the "talk" page. Is that where it is supposed to be?
If not, can you move it to where it's supposed to be for submission please. Thank You (Garydaigle (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Yes, it's in its proper place. Because of technical limitations, IPs cannot create normal pages...only talk pages. Because IPs are the ones who normally use this system, we've set it up so that all pages automatically use the talk page. NoleloverTalk·Contribs15:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have been given the reason that the subject matter is not notable enough to be included. However the article demonstrates that Locayta is a partner company to Venda and Demandware (both of whom have published wikipedia articles) and was founded by Dan Wagner (also featured on wikipedia). There are several public references cited both within the article and in the references.
In the original article I did mention the fact that Locayta is the company behind the online merchandising strategies for a number of globally recognised brands including Tesco, Boohoo, Superdry, the British Museum, Paperchase and Prezzybox. However my last editor removed that reference from the article. Locayta have also developed the world's first online merchandising platform that enables retailers to control visual merchandising, product recommendations and all search and navigation functions within a single system. This is a first for e-commerce and very significant for online retailers. As such I would consider the company notable. But I had to take that reference out as well as I was told it was reading too much like an ad!
Can you please advise what needs to be done to demonstrate the notability of this subject. Since wikipedia already features articles on companies such as Magento, Demandware and Venda I cannot understand why a similar company who have introduced a completely new e-commerce tool used by a number of worldwide leading retailers cannot be included as well.
I would be most grateful for your advice. Thank you in advance for your help.
Almost everything on Wikipedia needs to demonstrate it is notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. This normally means it has to have been noticed and reported in depth in reliable news sources. There do not seem to be any news sources referenced in your article that talk about Locayta in detail. Companies do not inherit notability from their notable founders, or notable clients, or notable partners. You'll need to show Locayta is notable in its own right. Sionk (talk) 17:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To use an existing image, insert [[File:imagenamehere.jpg]] into the text, with "imagenamehere" replaced by the text you want to enter. A412 (Talk • C) 23:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To use an existing image, insert [[File:imagenamehere.jpg]] into the text, with "imagenamehere" replaced by the text you want to enter. A412 (Talk • C) 23:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello this is my first time making a wikipedia page and I was wondering how to get some pictures on it?
This page I'm making is about an author that isn't on here.
Thank You.
HTcreager (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So, if you want to upload an image, and then add it to the article, see the guide on uploading images.
To use an existing image, insert [[File:imagenamehere.jpg]] into the text, with "imagenamehere" replaced by the text you want to enter. A412 (Talk • C) 23:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Try to reformat your article using inline citations, at the moment is is impossible to tell if the article is suitably referenced because they are formatted poorly. Have a look at WP:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Citing sources. Most importantly though it needs rewriting, as it contains material copied directly from the source, for instance "A true landmark, the wynne is recognized throughout Philadelphia. Located in the Wynnefield section, it was named for the attending physician of William Penn. David Wynne lived in this area, a community that dates from the 1690s and one that included a diverse population in the 20th century" is copied verbatim from [1]. Copying and pasting text is not allowed.France3470(talk)23:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no link to the French + German version of berthe Weill ; how can I do it ?
There is no link to the French + German version of "Berthe Weill" ; how can I do it ?
Done - for future reference, just add [[xx:Article name]] at the end of the article for each version; xx being the language prefix of the wiki in question, e.g. "fr" is for French and "de" for German as per the ISO 639-1 standard, full list here. Cheers, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
made a number of changes and added several sources. among the 26 independent sources are the new york times magazine, the washington times, centre national du livre, kirkus reviews, philadelphia inquirer, the new york times (editorial), virginia quarterly review, the boston globe, the san francisco chronicle, summaries of 12 reviews from french national media from publisher's home page, poets & writers magazine (largest literary non-profit organization in the united states), the international herald tribune, le monde diplomatique, the financial times, publisher's weekly, among others. separated sections for awards and critical recognition. when will the article be reviewed?Fountainheads (talk) 13:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are over 400 articles waiting to be reviewed, so you may have to wait a few days. In the meantime, you have an opportunatity to take another look at Wikipedia's guidelines for what is, and is not, suitable to be the subject of an article. I particularly mean the general notability guidelines, WP:GNG, and the alternative criteria for authors, at WP:CREATIVE. Generally, the subject (Berberian) needs to have been covered in-depth in reliable, independent news sources. Alternatively, authors could be notable if they have published something that has been the subject of multiple periodical reviews, or articles.
Having had a quick look at your draft article, I would advise you that periodical articles by Berberian (like in the Financial Times) won't count towards notability. Neither will the brief mentions in the New York Times. Book reviews (basically sales pitches) by book publishers or book sales sites are not generally independent and reliable either. Other Wikipedia articles aren't acceptable references. Personally I'd have difficulty accepting your article at the moment. Sionk (talk) 14:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Berberian's debut novel was very widely reviewed, which means he easily meets the WP:CREATIVE notability criteria. Well done and good luck with future contributions to Wikipedia! Sionk (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Having read over the submission and considered the points made by four separate reviewers against the arguments put fourth by PCMorphy72 (talk·contribs), there seems to be a clear consensus—grounded in policy—that the subject of the article does not meet any Wikipedia threshold for notability. Accordingly, and contrary to the assertions made by the author, it would appear that the submission that is unsuitable, rather than the reviewers. Finally, pursuant to our policy on no personal attacks, I feel it is time to close this discussion Pol430talk to me19:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'll look this over, but if four different editors decline, I suggest you take into account the possibility that your submission just isn't right for Wikipedia. I'll reply here when I'm done. NoleloverTalk·Contribs15:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This article absolutely cannot be accepted because the images from ancestry.com are complete copyright violations. The terms and conditions are very explicit, and copying images from that site easily violates the 'Republication or resale' clause there. Yes, I read your explanation but that simply is not valid. You have not just copied the information, you have copied the format and style as well, which most certainly comes under the "creative aspects of collection" of Feist v. Rural and...err...Wikitravel's (really?) "expression of that information". Even apart from that, you show some misunderstandings of the way we work. I note one place you say "the statement ... should be easily inferred..." No. Sorry, but we do not infer. That's what we call synthesis, a form of original research. Also, in your second reply to Chiswick Chap you split up his comment, responding to the important about Syd and genealogies separately. That's exactly the opposite of what you'd need to do to prove notability. We know that Syd is notable. We know that genealogies are notable. What we don't know is why the genealogy of Syd is notable, and that question is not answered satisfactorily anywhere. I'm sorry, but even apart from all that Wikipedia is not for indiscriminate collections of information, which is what the appears to be. I thank you for your work, but this topic simply does not appear to be right for Wikipedia. NoleloverTalk·Contribs15:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The news are two:
1. Before your problems with copyright was about the information I wrote, but now the problems are with the small images and the format of the rectangles which Ancestry.com uses. The infer issue you are talking about simply doesn't exist: if you are not able to infer how indiscreet was a biographer to know the name of Syd's relatives, simply use the entire biographer's book as reference, as I've seen a lot of times an entire book as a reference in Wikipedia. You know that Syd is notable but you don't know that genealogies are notable, since the lack of biographical genealogy on Wikipedia and internet, for Syd and for the many other important persons: perhaps your grandsons will know it.
2. Now we are four (who talk about information and not about that images).
Not sure I quite understand your second point, and the copyright comment...also, the issue about the infer issue is not whether or not you are right, it's that you seem to be looking at Wikipedia wrong. I didn't even look at what you are attempting to infer. It's just the usage of that word that scares me. NoleloverTalk·Contribs17:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wrongly wrote we instead of you: I meant "Now you are four". When I've realized it, I've edited it, but after I re-edited in we with that comment between brackets to let you understand that your comments on the other reviewers's non-agreed comments are absoultely unuseful for me if you don't understand my points in a worse way than the other reviewers, and then, in a joking way, I had excluted you from the count to add me as fourth.
You have simply seen what something seems: it is obvius that the word "infer" can mean many things, so I've ask to read carefully, but you simply report generic unuseful things, which are trivial, or at least I known them very well. Don't worry if you believe I don't understand Wikipedia: I think you are able only to censor users on Wikipedia, not to understand how Wikipedia should work.PCMorphy72 (talk) 18:42, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Greetings helpers ....
It may be obvious that I am a newbie in need of help and support. Any pointers or directions would be most gratefully received.
I have submitted the above item twice and it seems that I have not satisfied the need to 'adequately support the copy with reliable independent sources'
My inline citations refer to several already published Wikipedia articles and to verified sources within the British Broadcasting Corporation BBC.
I would very much appreciate your guidance as to what I am doing wrong.
Thank you for your time and expertise - Dai
(Daybydaiboy (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]
You are citing BBC blogs and podcasts by Knowles. These won't count towards establishing her importance or notability. You need to look for reliable in-depth coverage about Knowles. It's not much use citing Wikipedia articles either, because they are created and edited by many different editors so not ..erm ...reliable sources. Sionk (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have met Agha Syed ali Sharf ul Din Moosvi personally.
He is a very great man. He has worked a lot on research on Islamic history.
in 1980's he was very famous scholar but when he started to write the books and spoke truth about Islam, All his Friends and Whole Shia Muslims became his enemy....
As for the notability of Brian Stacey, is it insufficient that he was Australia's foremost orchestral conductor at the time of his death? Se the comments of Andrew Lloyd Webber and others as quoted in The Age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neapolitankids (talk • contribs) 13:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done
Resolved
Working Nolelover Talk·Contribs 15:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
