Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 August 24
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < August 23 | << Jul | August | Sep >> | August 25 > |
| 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. |
August 24 edit
01:27:10, 24 August 2018 review of submission by GarettStienfeildLLC edit
GarettStienfeildLLC (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
What can i added Flow 187 is a well known artist
- Hi GarettStienfeildLLC. After reviewing the draft and searching reliable sources for hip hop topics (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources for examples), I have to agree with the other three reviewers of the draft. Flow 187 is not well known enough to warrant an encyclopedia article. There isn't anything to be done about that except wait. It might be too soon, and Flow 187 could become notable later in his career. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
08:04:52, 24 August 2018 review of submission by FPDColch edit
I have created a new article for the holding group of Geely Auto, Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zhejiang_Geely_Holding_Group)
As it stands, the ZGH term redirects to Geely, however these are inherently seperate objects. How do I go about ensuring that my new ZGH page is set up seperately?
FPDColch (talk) 08:04, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @FPDColch: The consensus appears to be that Zhejiang Geely Holding Group is most commonly referred to simply as Geely, so that will be the article's name. Wikipedia favors large, comprehensive articles, so it is not unusual for Zhejiang Geely Holding Group to cover all of its subsidiaries and brands, including those with Geely in the name. This result may pain you, but whatever you do, don't edit the article directly. See WP:BFAQ#EDIT.
- If you try to sway consensus against this result by posting on Talk:Geely, be sure to: (1) disclose your conflict of interest in the discussion, (2) cite reliable sources that support your position, and (3) sign your post with four tildes. You have a better chance of eliciting a response if you formulate your post as a {{request edit}}, but to do so you'll have to be very specific about what text you want to change and what you want to change it to. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
12:10:46, 24 August 2018 review of submission by Shmuel.zweinstein edit
- I have added references to address reviewer's feedback - Also, as I explained to the reviewer, please note the subject's popularity started in the Russian emigre circles in the United States and Europe - hence the references are "slanted" towards Russian-oriented sources - Please re-review the draft.
Shmuel.zweinstein (talk) 12:10, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, @Shmuel.zweinstein:. I've not checked over your sources, but you may well have resolved the issue on which your draft was rejected. You've properly re-submitted your draft, so it will re-enter the process and be reviewed as your previous one was. Clearly there are a lot of drafts in the system at the moment, so that may or may not take some time. Your previous reviewer may take a more direct look at it, but some prefer not to re-review their own work, to ensure an objective set of eyes. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you @Nosebagbear:. I appreciate your clarification. And it sounds like since it's been resubmitted, my course of action is to await the second round of reviews, which I will. Thanks again!
- Sorry to bug you @Nosebagbear: I am new at this... but when will this re-review happen, and do I need to do anything to make it happen? It has been two weeks since I made the changes to address reviewer's remarks. Is it in the queue, and someone will get to it, or is it "stuck" somehow? Please advise!
13:13:20, 24 August 2018 review of submission by RAJIVVASUDEV edit
- RAJIVVASUDEV (talk · contribs)
Rajiv Sharma (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Sir, I sincerely need suggestions to improve the format and tone of the draft. Thanks Rajiv Sharma (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi RAJIVVASUDEV. Sometimes less is more. The draft is a sprawling mish-mash. I recommend starting over with 6-8 excellent sources. Choose highly cited scholarly sources that cover the topic at considerable depth. Use a couple of encyclopedias to establish the scope of the article - what to cover in order to be complete. A few suggested sources:
- Watkins, Susan M.; Dunne, Lucy (2015). Functional Clothing Design: From Sportswear to Spacesuits. Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-0-85785-467-4.
- Pan, N.; Sun, G. (2011). Functional Textiles for Improved Performance, Protection and Health. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-85709-287-8.
- Gupta, Deepti (December 2011). "Functional clothing–Definition and classification". Indian Journal of Fibre & Textile Research. 36: 321–326. ISSN 0975-1025.
- Watkins, Susan M. (2003). "Functional Clothing Design". In Lerner, Richard M.; Schiamberg, Lawrence B.; Anderson, Pamela M. (eds.). Encyclopedia of Human Ecology. Vol. A–H. ABC-CLIO. pp. 315–317. ISBN 978-1-57607-852-5.
- Find a few more, and use the 6-8 sources to write a short draft that sketches out the topic. Summarize the sources in your own words, don't copy them. Sections can be expanded after the draft is accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:33, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I got it, Thanks for your help. Let me try again. ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 07:51, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- Worldbruce (talk) Sir, I have corrected the things, Please have a review and comment. Thanks Rajiv Sharma (talk) 13:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- Aeanderson2 (talk · contribs)
Greetings, our Academy of Mathematics & Science page continues to be declined. However, it is almost identical to the Kansas Academy of Mathematics & Science page which has already been published and existed on Wikipedia for many years. We do not understand why this page does not meet the requirements but the other does. They are the same Early College Program (not an honors program), they just serve a different population of student. Please clarify why this page does not meet the qualification but the other does. Thanks!
Aeanderson2 (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi @Aeanderson2:. Firstly, I took your comment out the shaded in bit - anything inside the "<!-- ... -->" bit can only be seen when editing.
- The presence (or absence) of another article doesn't mean that the existence of another, similar, article can be justified. Otherwise a few articles that didn't meet the guidelines could be used to justify bringing everything else in. Each article is required to stand on its own merits. If you want a longer read of this have a glance at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
- Usually in these cases it means the other, similar, article could actually be proposed for deletion. For example, the Kansas Academy page might also not meet the requirements to remain in Wiki, though it's a little harder to make it in than it is to be removed (we do that so as to reduce the chances of drafts being accepted and then challenged by another editor).
- Of more importance is adding your own references. You need neutral (non-student good newspapers, journal articles, most books etc) sources, that discuss the Academy in detail (called Significant Coverage, or SIGCOV). At least two is advised. You can use other sources to support individual facts in your article, but you need those high quality sources to support the presence of the article as a whole.
Nosebagbear (talk) 20:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
15:59:34, 24 August 2018 review of submission by 168.9.213.75 edit
- 168.9.213.75 (talk · contribs)
168.9.213.75 (talk) 15:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I JUST NEED A WIKIPEDIA PAGE BECAUSE MY SCHOOL THAT I RUN NEEDS TO BECOME BETTER THAN ALL THESE OTHER PLACES
Hello.. I created a page on the Indian association of dermatologists,venereologists and leprologists( IADVL) using articles published in PUBMED indexed journals (considered to be one of the highest index for medical journals) and the official website of the organisation.. but my reviewer says my sources are not reliable .. please guide me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Sneha Gandhi (talk • contribs) 17:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)