Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 June 13

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< June 12 << May | June | Jul >> June 14 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


June 13

edit

01:56:49, 13 June 2014 request for review by Janisadore

edit

Hello, I've submitted an article, which was rejected. I added material, including more references by third-party publications, and it was again rejected. It sounds like the tech business and industry journals i've cited (including TechCrunch, Gigaom, and Wall Street Journal) are not recognized as valid citations by the editors who reviewed. I've since added a Financial Times citation as well. Is it possible to request a reviewer with knowledge of tech industry publications, or are such industry publications considered by definiton invalid?

In the meantime, I'm working on expanding the article further, but I wanted to get some advice on the validity of the citations before I put too much more work into it.

Thanks for any help you can provide.

Janet Janisadore (talk) 01:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Welcome! Is it Draft:Ecwid that you are talking about? Or another page? Your message is not so easy to understand. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at it, some of the citations are mere notices, or routine notices of funding, or mentions in an article without any substantial discussion of the specific subject (like the Huffington Post article) . Some others are clearly just press releases, like ref. 3, or Businesswire. The WSJ article is a press release, not an article: it says, right at the top, in red, "The Wall Street Journal news department was not involved in the creation of this content. PRESS RELEASE". You should limit it to those references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. What works best is true 3rd party product reviews in depth. If you have them, then there's the basis for an article. DGG ( talk ) 04:32, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

01:58:10, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Mikey909

edit


Mikey909 (talk) 01:58, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have a problem. I have been asked by a friend, musician Rick Rosas, to post his bio on Wikipedia. He is a noted session bass player for such professional musicians as Neil Young, Joe Walsh and the Buffalo Springfield.

I wrote up his biography but couldn't find a way to include the references I used, almost all were from Wikipedia. The article was rejected. I have edited many Wiki articles but haven't uploaded anything in years. I don't recall this being so complicated before. How do I include the references and how do I type in the small numbers to indicate those references?

Thanks, Mike Thomas

Hey Mike! Which music magazines or newspaper music reviews or things like that wrote about Rosas? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:59, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Mikey909, for footnoting see WP:Referencing for beginners. Also note you cannot cite Wikipedia on itself, that would be circular logic. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

03:47:56, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Bloosteak

edit


Bloosteak (talk) 03:47, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources, therefore non-notable. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:24, 12 June 2014 (UTC)"

This is an arcade game and it's sold in China and Southeast Asia. I have a reference of Chinese media covering its launch. Arcade games are generally not reviewed in gaming media. How is it possible to establish notability in this field? Is there a list of qualified Southeast Asian or Chinese media?

See similar wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_Evolution Also lacks notability but is approved

Existence and launch is not sufficient to prove notability. You are welcome to continue to work on and improve the article Dance Evolution if that is what you are interested in. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

05:12:54, 13 June 2014 review of submission by BeaumontStreet

edit


Hi Just checking if this submission has been received and is waiting for review? Thanks

BeaumontStreet (talk) 05:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it has and is. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

09:41:35, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Hpcn8888

edit


As suggested by the Reviewers, I have revised above entry with major content and notable revisions on 24 March 2014. Please advise status of review and any comments? Many thanks Henry

Hpcn8888 09:41, 13 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpcn8888 (talk • contribs)

Your submission, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Successful Business Dealings & Management with China Oil, Gas & Chemical Giants was declined by Libby norman on 18 March, and has not been resubmitted since then. You can resubmit it by pressing the blue submit button, but I advise you not to do so at this stage as the article still reads like a promotional piece for a book, that is largely only cited to self-published and primary sources, and is likely to be declined again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hpcn8888: To be a little more exact, what works best are book reviews providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. Not Amazon, not reader-contributed content, but reviews in major professional or trade journals. DGG ( talk ) 03:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10:15:43, 13 June 2014 review of submission by KM1977

edit

I want to check only that I have submitted my wikipedia draft page to teh correct place. I clicked submit draft in sandbox and it says that it was submitted but when I went to teh AFC page I could see it was in my personal page. Do I need to go to teh yellow box under my draft box in sandbox and move it to another location for review? KM1977 (talk) 10:15, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your submission is queued for review and should be reviewed at some point. There is still a backlog of around 450 submissions as I write this, but attempts are being made to reduce this. One point I would make is to have a read through our guidelines for reliable sources for medicine to check the sources you have supplied meet these. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:33, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11:40:58, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Mulayrahul

edit


I had submitted the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vikas_Joshi. It was declined and the reason cited was that the references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability. I have added neutral references - industry articles, articles from business publications, interviews as well as the awards and speaking engagements. I request a re-review to understand what else will be required.

RM (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've already submitted the draft for another review, so you don't need to request anything here separately. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Demiurge1000. The reason I requested review is that, if there is something that needs to be added/changed, I would rather know it sooner than having the article declined again for the same reasons. RM (talk) 12:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  Accepted, now live. Bellerophon talk to me 14:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12:11:32, 13 June 2014 review of submission by WhistleblowerOz

edit

I submitted my first page this morning but I cant find it any where. how do I find out whether I submitted it properly WhistleblowerOz (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your only edit to Wikipedia under this account is here, and you haven't told us what the article is called, so I'm afraid I cannot help you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16:04:40, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Almhath

edit


Almhath (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have been trying for months to develop an article for Joseph F. Ware, Jr., founder of the JFW jr Advanced Engineering Lab at Virginia Tech and flight test engineer in charge of everything at Lockheed Skunk Works from the P-38 Lightning to the U-2 and the SR-71. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Joseph_F._Ware,_Jr.&oldid=611708040 I have been learning the process to create the article. But I am not finding the status of my latest revision (5 June). Can anyone tell me or where I go to f ind it? Or how to fix it if it's not okay?

Joseph Ware, Jr. is well regarded at Virginia Tech and at the Lockheed Skunk Works. His contributions have been extremely notable in the area of aerospace engineering, U.S. defense and reconnaissance.

I have many photos, many of them originals that I have taken, including such as one with Jack Real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Real , friend of Joe's and whom Joe hired at Lockheed, Willis Hawkins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willis_Hawkins , friend and former executive at Lockheed...etc.

I am his wife, widow.

It seems to me that the article I've been trying to create for Joseph F. Ware, Jr., is at least as specific and authentic, but I'm having trouble doing it right per wikipedia's guidelines? I'm guessing?

And finding someone to help at Wikipedia is almost impossible. EXAMPLE: I get referred to the Teahouse, but when I type my question (like the first paragraph here), and end with 4 tildes, still the Ask my Question button on screen does not illuminate, and I cannot click it.

Thank you for any help you can give.

Thank you Jenna Ware (wife/widow)

˜˜˜˜

Hi. I had a look for sources, and Cmdr Ware does appear in several, not least the Virginia Tech laboratory named after him. To me, that qualifies him under our guidelines on academics as a named appointment in a significant academic institution, so the article should be passed. I have now done this and it can be found at Joseph F Ware Jr. I have also added it to the Military history WikiProject, who may be able to help develop it further. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete my account

edit

kindly delete my username and user page

delete my account

edit

kindly delete my username and user page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonface Momanyi (talk • contribs) 17:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Help desk. - This is where editors will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for any help related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 16:58, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18:49:16, 13 June 2014 review of submission by EBstrunk18

edit

Hello, Recently, I submitted an article for creation on an ice cream company called Salt and Straw. I am in no way affiliated with this company, other than I once ate their ice cream and wanted to know more about the company. While looking at Google results, I believed the company would easily pass the WP:CORP threshold. Plus, I really wanted to create my first article. Unfortunately, it was declined because of the very thing for which I originally noticed subject: notability. After reviewing the page again and moving references around and adding another, I'm confident the company would pass the notability threshold. However, I understand that my view could be skewed since I'm the one creating the page. If that is the case, and I'm missing something, could someone please indicate what the secondary source are missing. Maybe WP:CORPDEPTH? Something else? Any thoughts, comments, suggestions are more than welcome. Thanks for all your help!EBstrunk18 (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EBstrunk18 (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is one of our longstanding dilemmas. The notability of the establishment at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Salt and Straw seems to depend upon the many published discussions in the press, based primarily on the oddness of its flavors. This is intrinsically not a very secure basis for notability, but some of the discussions are substantial and in adequately reliable sources for the subject. They presumably are based to some extent on press releases, but I think the coverage is nonetheless genuine. It is therefore notable by our general guideline WP:GNG. But it may none the less not be suitable for an encyclopedia -- the policy here is WP:NOT NEWS, which supersedes the GNG. In a situation like this, no individual should make the decision--I would normally at this point accept it, and let the inevitable Articles for Deletion discussion decide.
But I suggest you improve the article first. It was not obvious to me from the article what the press coverage was about: I had to go read the sources. You need to add a few sentences to the article indicating this to the reader, because that's what the reader will want to know. And to make this clear, the references should be used to support the relevant parts of the article, not all listed generally at the end: Since most of the comments are about one particular flavor, the reverences for that point should go in the text after that statement. DGG ( talk ) 21:32, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DGG! Thanks for the helpful comments. I'll make the changes, then resubmit, and see how it goes. Again, thanks for your help. Best regardsEBstrunk18 (talk) 22:19, 13 June 2014 (UTC) 22:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:25:13, 13 June 2014 review of submission by Piwowath

edit

why was it declined? Piwowath (talk) 19:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is apparently Draft:North Mountain Lookout. (It would have helped me to say that when you asked the question) The key problem is that it needs more specific references. You referenced darringtonareabusinessassociation.com and summitpost.org, but you need to specify the exact link to the relevant website page for the first, and the specific link, and the day of publication and article title for the second. You then need to put the references i the text of the article so we can see what they actually support. See WP:REFBEGIN for the method. I am not sure whether this campsite would be considered notable , but it would help greatly to find additional sources, such as from printed guides to the areas or mentions in books or other published sources. DGG ( talk ) 21:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20:24:40, 13 June 2014 review of submission by MarkMillerITPro

edit

I tried to clean up the categories into the "box" of categories, but upon hitting preview, I couldn't see the result. Anyone willing to put the article's categories into the nice looking box format? MarkMillerITPro (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can probably see the result correctly if you edit (then preview) the entire page, rather than just the last section. However, it would be better to leave the categories where they are until the draft is accepted, because those type of categories are only supposed to be in accepted ("mainspace") articles. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! TY! MarkMillerITPro (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_June_13&oldid=1118357446"