Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 March 9

Help desk
< March 8	<< Feb | March | Apr >>	March 10 >

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.

March 9

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NPO Saturn AL-55I

My first article was the SBTF which got approved in a day or two! But my second article is taking weeks! Why is that? --Jaaron95 13:52, 9 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaaron95 (talk • contribs)

There is a severe backlog. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sydney Lyric Orchestra

Greetings

please cite which references that are not acceptable are "closely related to the orchestra"

regards

Musodata (talk) 14:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

• sydney lyric orchestra
• Opera Australia - Adrian Keating
• The Paris Opera Ballet
• Tim Woods Entertainment
• Dame Kiri Te Kanawa comes to the Hunter Valley - ABC Melbourne - Australian Broadcasting Corporation
• Opera in the Vineyards 2013

In addition, the following is a blog and thus not a reliable source;

• Andrew's Opera: Rodelinda in Sydney under Bonynge

That's a total of seven out of your eleven references that are either not reliable sources or not fully independent of the subject. So you can appreciate the reviewer's concern, especially if some of the remaining four don't contain significant coverage of the subject itself. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Andrew Jarvis

Hi, I'm trying to submit a wikipedia page on the Shakespearean British actor Andrew Jarvis. The piece has been turned down three times, because there is some issue about "notability". I've provided "third party" evidence of the subject's notability -- in the shape of National press coverage, and Globe exhibition and university websites, and can provide more, including the references for the reviews of his ground-breaking and award winning performance of Richard III, which he played for the English Shakespeare Company in 1989. Just because he is not a famous film actor in America, it doesn't mean he's not an important figure in British theatre - he is. He has done quite a lot of TV, including New Tricks, a prime time BBC 1 series, broadcasting this year. There are a dozen academic books on Shakespeare in performance that discuss his performances (and I've provided the references for them, too).

Can you tell me what more needs to be done in order to get this important figure onto the Wikipedia radar?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gillianpiggott/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillianpiggott (talk • contribs) 16:25, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Cheers,

Dr Gillian Piggott — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillianpiggott (talk • contribs) 16:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

To me, Jarvis looks likely to be notable. At present, though, it's not easy for a reviewer to tell that from your submission.

Start by removing all of the references to blogspot and wordpress - they are not reliable sources.

IMDB goes under "External links", not as a reference - it is not a reliable source.

You may wish to read Wikipedia:CHEATSHEET for help with formatting, including using proper section headings instead of just using bold text.

You could look for Wikipedia Good Articles about similar actors at Wikipedia:Good articles/Media and drama#Actors, directors, models, performers and celebrities for examples of how to lay things out. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:43, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Solution (dinghy)

Hi, I do not know how to interpret this message: "Draft article not currently submitted for review. This is a draft Articles for creation submission. It is not currently pending review. There are no deadlines as long as you are actively improving the submission." As far as I am aware, my article on the Solution (dinghy) HAS been submitted for review in the normal way. If I need to do something more, I would be grateful for advice on what I should be doing. If the article is in fact now awaiting review, can I suggest that WP changes the wording of the message that I have quoted above? It's a very discouraging message for an inexperienced author! Thanks, RoachPeter (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

How about reading the whole of the submission box message? It will be submitted when you click the large green button at the bottom of the template labelled "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!". However most of the content of the article has no references so you should fix that before you do click the submit button. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I did click the green bar but nothing seemed to happen, hence my uncertainty about whether the article had been successfully submitted. I will try again. Concerning the lack of references, I have modelled this article on those of comparable racing dinghies with which the Solution regularly competes, e.g. Solo, Phantom or Enterprise, and find they have no more references than my article does. Dinghy sailing does not appear to have the rich literature of my own academic field. However, I will try to find more before resubmitting. RoachPeter (talk) 08:39, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

@RoachPeter - If you have access to a reasonably large public or academic library you might find good reference material in sailing magazines. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I have improved the references and today (March 12th)submitted the article. It now looks as if my first attempt, on March 8th, did after all succeed in making it to the list of articles for review. Is it possible to remove this earlier version and leave the improved version in place? Thank you. RoachPeter (talk) 10:51, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello RoachPeter- I didn't understand what do you mean by "earlier version" and "improved version" of the submission page. Did you create an another submission page that you assume is better than earlier one? Do you mean your submission page Solution (dinghy) was better some time earlier before it was edited to make it look like present form?

Solution: In first case, (a) Edit the present submission page and replace the content with improved submission page, (b) Submit the improve version putting {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page and delete the earlier version by putting {{db-U1}}. In second case, Visit your submission page, click "History" and select any two version (by date and time), compare and restore the earlier version you wish to have. There you can find "Undo" option as well, might be proved useful to you. Thank you! Anupmehra -Let's talk! 11:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. I got stuck trying to submit the Solution (dinghy) article and got a message from Dodger67 (see above), telling me that I needed to improve the references, but I don't know if this was an actual rejection requiring a resubmission. Anyway, I now seem to have two versions (the original and the new improved version) both in the pipeline. I will follow your advice and mark the original unsatisfactory version for removal, leaving just the improved version in the queue. RoachPeter (talk) 11:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Waa-Mu Show

Hi,

I was told my submission was declined and then deleted due to copyright infringement. I was attempting to fix the article and resubmit but it appears to be deleted from everywhere. What should I do? Can I find my first submission and edit it? Thewaamushow (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Because it is a copyright infringement, the best thing to do is simply to rewrite the article from scratch. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 05:15, 10 March 2014 (UTC)