Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 September 10
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < September 9 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 11 > |
| 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. |
September 10 edit
01:49:05, 10 September 2017 review of submission by Perplexed12 edit
- Perplexed12 (talk · contribs)
Perplexed12 (talk) 01:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC) I have submitted a photo of Reginald Newton to Wikicommons to be the profile picture on his page. Do I leave this to someone who knows how to attach the photo or do I have to do it (when I know how)?
- Hi Perplexed12, I found the photo at File:Reg Newton.jpg. You, or anyone else, can use it in any relevant article - see the Picturetutorial. Please also edit the description on the file page to include the date, place, and possibly the occasion, when the photo was taken. Given his formal dress and medals I presume it was taken at a memorial event. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
04:33:53, 10 September 2017 review of submission by 103.5.134.74 edit
- 103.5.134.74 (talk · contribs)
It was a draft article on an eminent professor of India, who also researched and taught in US universities after his PhD and Post Doctoral Studies. I observed similar profiles on wikipedia especially of eminent professors of US. I was yet to add sources for reference and citation. It is just that in India we do not have enough forums where professors are profiled, and their achievements highlighted. All that matters is the government recognised degrees and jobs. You could help Indian academia by accepting such articles and ofcourse, we shall provide as many sources as possible. 103.5.134.74 (talk) 04:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Challapalli Purnachandra Rao I'm afraid you are mistaken about Wikipedia's purpose - we have absolutely no interest in "helping Indian academia" or anything else for that matter. We record only topics that are already proven to be notable. You have to first provide the required sources, only then can the draft be properly evaluated. The draft currently has no referennces at all, so in fact we do not even have any evidence that the subject even exists. Sources first, then if it complies with the minimal standards, we accept the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
09:20:26, 10 September 2017 review of submission by Nehaldutta edit
- Nehaldutta (talk · contribs)
- @Nehaldutta: Hi, and welcome to the AFC help desk. Did you have a question? jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
12:23:55, 10 September 2017 review of submission by Cosecant57 edit
- Cosecant57 (talk · contribs)
Apparently, my AfC submission on a novel does not have any information on the web about its reception on sales numbers and critical response. Is it okay to leave the "Reception" section, stating that there have not been any reviews or published articles about the reception of the novel?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosecant57 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Cosecant57, I'm afraid the answer is a definite "No". It is the existence of published reviews by professional critics that make a novel notable, without such reviews it simply does not qualify for an article here. If no credible commentator has written about it, there is nothing we can say about it except that it exists, but mere existence is not sufficient for an article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:40, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
21:42:27, 10 September 2017 review of submission by Lak2017 edit
Dear Wikipedia Editors,
This is Lak2017...having just sent off my Draft Article on "The Conspiracy of Three" reading series, which has been running for almost thirty years in North Bay, and which has featured readers from across Canada in that time. I have just received an early response DECLINING my submission, so naturally I am eager to learn how to address the perceived failing. To address "notability" I noted that Canada Council sponsorship has been received for a long list of writers, cited in the article, as well as support from Nipissing University. I also included nine internal links to Wikipedia sites for authors who have read at Conspiracy of Three. National awards have been won by such writers, including the venerable Order of Canada. Please advise me on what sources we could add to address this criticism. Thank you.
Lak2017 (talk) 21:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: Worldbruce has replied on the draft itself. If you have any further questions, please ask. jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)