Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Talk page
ReviewerAFCH
Submissions
CategoryList
Showcase Assessment Participants Reviewing instructions Help desk Backlog drives
Shortcuts:
Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
Click here to ask a new question.

A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

06:56:30, 25 January 2015 review of submission by Nahidacste36

Contents


January 25[edit]

11:00:44, 25 January 2015 review of submission by Hqaddomi[edit]


Hello,

I wrote this article long time and they reviewers asked for reliable references to show the artists' works which I added in the sections "Event" and "References", yet I've been told it's not enough and the resources are not reliable or mentioning the subject although they all are from official sources and all mentioning the artist by name.

Many sources also talks about the artist but in Arabic which I think is not understood by the reviewer but all of them are from official resources. The comment of the reviewer was:

"Event listings are not a reliable source for biographical claims the way you have used them. There are several broken reference links and also references that do not seem to mention the subject at all. It just does not appear that the subject is going to be notable under our standards."

there was only one link that was down, from the source, and it was actually working when submitted but I removed it anyway.

Please help.

Hqaddomi (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

19:00:27, 25 January 2015 review of submission by 103.255.232.14[edit]


103.255.232.14 (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Write about origination about kochaisa kurmi

103.255.232.14, we can't understand what you're asking. Please provide a link to the page in question, and let us know what your question is. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

20:08:51, 25 January 2015 review of submission by Bnotepr[edit]


Bnotepr (talk) 20:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Regards; I hope you can help. I know you guys have a lot of drafts to be reviewed. The reason I am writing is mine is from December 12. I would like (if is possible) to be reviewed, no matter if get no approved (crossing my fingers it does). I re-arrange the article adding more external sources., here is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cirex Thanks in advance Bnotepr (talk) 20:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bnotepr: Symbol declined.svg Declined An article about Cirex has been deleted several times over the past few years because Cirex is simply not notable. You would do well to read our notability criteria specific for musicians as well as our standards on what sources are considered "reliable". You fail to make the case. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:43, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

22:59:09, 25 January 2015 review of submission by Klwhfb[edit]


Hello, thank you for reviewing my article. Can I change my submission from an article submission to a stub submission? We are modeling the submission after the "School Psychology Quarterly" article which is a stub.

Thank you!

Klwhfb (talk) 22:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Klwhfb: A "stub" is simply a way to label articles that are very short and require expansion; there is no separate stub submission process, as all stubs are articles and have the same inclusion requirements as any other article. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

January 26[edit]

08:32:24, 26 January 2015 review of submission by Ctechroyston[edit]


An article I wrote that has just been approved has picked up the history from my sandbox with content not relevant for this submission. Is there any way this can be removed by a Wikipedia user? (Thank you!) The historical sandbox data is from 2013. The history for this article is only relevant from 2015 onwards.

Ctechroyston (talk) 08:32, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Ctechroyston: It sounds like a WP:HISTSPLIT situation, which requires an administrator to fix. @Anne Delong: can you help? Chris Troutman (talk) 15:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

09:03:24, 26 January 2015 review of submission by Boglarnemeth[edit]

Dear Reviewer, my article submission has been declined, could you tell me about detailed what was the problem, what should I modify? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Swaen_(malt_house) Regards, Boglarnemeth

Boglarnemeth (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Boglarnemeth: Your draft lacks the independent reliable sources needed to make a claim of corporate or general notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

13:48:46, 26 January 2015 review of submission by Janani.Jayabal[edit]


Janani.Jayabal (talk) 13:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Janani.Jayabal: Find newspaper articles about the subject. The sources you cite are insufficient. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 21:43:35, 26 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Kingston451[edit]


I have been working on my first article titled Boris Townsend which I submitted for review. I had not proved that I own the copyright for a photo in the article, but thought I had deleted the photo. I can no longer find the article or any record of it in my sandbox or anywhere else. I understand the restrictions on copyright and I am sourcing a different photograph. But where is the rest of the article?

Kingston451 (talk) 21:43, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

It seems very unlikely that User:Alexf would have deleted your entire draft, which was at Draft:Boris Townsend, just because of a copyright issue with the photo. It appears there was also a copyright issue with the text of your draft, namely that the text already existed elsewhere on the internet, without any indication that the text was freely licensed. You need to write draft articles in your own words ... you cannot copy and paste from other material on the internet. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

22:14:29, 26 January 2015 review of submission by PeaceofHistory[edit]


PeaceofHistory (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I have a few questions about the article I have submitted. I am volunteering for an archive and we are hoping to provide more information to some of the locales that are listed on an already existing wiki (in my case it is locations in the county of Grande Prairie in northern Alberta). Is there a way that I can do this without having to wait for the article to be approved?

We are hoping to expand on a number of these old sites, and are wondering if we do a number of them, how long it may take to have them actually posted.

Thanks--PeaceofHistory (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

You can if you wish add information directly to the existing article County of Grande Prairie No. 1 without needing to wait for any approval process. You would do this by clicking Edit at the top of that page, and saving your changes, preferably including an Edit Summary. It's fine to do this while also waiting for your draft to be approved. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

22:58:21, 26 January 2015 review of submission by Kinderdeo[edit]


Hi there my article on "Chaheru" was accepted on Jan 2, 2015. Since that time I have received feedback from the affected persons. Hence I have edited the article, in a very minor way, dated January 26 and now would like to 1. change title of the Article to "Chiheru"...which was indicated as aka in the accepted article. It is much more known as Chiheru rather than Chaheru. 2. Move the article to "Chiheru" from the name "Chaheru", 3. Have the article reviewed and accepted. Thx. kinder deo (talk) 22:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC) kinder deo (talk) 22:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

To change the title of a page you WP:Move it to the new title. The article has already been reviewed and accepted, AFC has no further interest in it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

23:12:15, 26 January 2015 review of submission by Thomaspeck8[edit]

Hello, I tried to write an article the other day about a locally known rapper. It got declined due to copy write issues and I was wondering why. Thanks

Thomaspeck8 (talk) 23:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Thomaspeck8: You've answered your own question. Copyrighted content is not allowed on Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

January 27[edit]

09:02:25, 27 January 2015 review of submission by CharlesBGlazer[edit]


I was told this contains copyrighted material, but I don't know what part is at issue. As far as I know, none of it is subject to copyright protection, as I wrote it myself, and I own the photo.

CharlesBGlazer (talk) 09:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@CharlesBGlazer: Wikipedia assumes content is copyrighted, even if copyright is not asserted by the source. If you wrote the content and published it elsewhere online, you would need to donate it to public domain in order to re-use it here. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

09:51:16, 27 January 2015 review of submission by WikiInUser[edit]


I want to upload some images on my page 'Intent Driven Design' to make the article simpler to understand.

Can you please tell me how can I upload image from my local desktop, so that they will appear at expected position in the article ?

WikiInUser (talk) 09:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello WikiInUser, the advice you seek is at Wikipedia:Uploading images. However, please refrain from adding images until after your article has published, as we do not need the images until then. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 10:55:59, 27 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Seyyedhosseinzadeh[edit]


Dear Reviewer,

I have received following message on my under review article:

The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Would you please let me know what kind of "copyrighted information" and then accordingly I could resolve it.

Many thanks, Dr. Seyyedhosseinzadeh


Seyyedhosseinzadeh (talk) 10:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@Seyyedhosseinzadeh: - When you submit content onto Wikipedia, there is an agreement (just above the "Save page" button that states you agree to release contributions under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Licence and the GFDL. What this means is you permit all of your edits to be freely republished and even sold for profit elsewhere. Since, by default, most websites do not have this licence, a copy and paste of a site onto Wikipedia has to be considered a violation of that copyright, and incompatible with our standard text licence. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:59, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

15:11:40, 27 January 2015 review of draft by Penthrift[edit]


I think the article is ready for submission. But I have not found proof that Walter Mondale was his student, although I know from Dr. Armajani (when he was alive) that this was the case and that Mondale consulted with him during the Iran Hostage Crisis. My plan is submit the article as is, leaving in that Mondale was his student, while I search for proof of that and of his consulting during the crisis. Is that fine? Regarding the latter, if I were to get such confirmation in writing from Mondale, would that constitute "original research" and thus not be allowed? Thank you for you help. Penthrift (talk) 15:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@Penthrift: Yes, that would be original research. Wikipedia would need a newspaper or scholarly article to publish that claim; you could then cite that article to source the assertion. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penthrift (talkcontribs) 17:12, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

16:11:10, 27 January 2015 review of submission by ZRay22[edit]

Hi guys, I submitted this but was told that it was too similar to this document here: http://www.brad.ac.uk/library/media/library/specialcollections/documents/CwlPTCCLDApr2010.pdf

I did use this document as a source and referenced it at the bottom of the page. I also paraphrased and submitted but it was still not accepted. Could you please take a look at the page and see what else I could change? This is my first page and I'd love to get it up and running : )

ZRay22 ZRay22 (talk) 16:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@ZRay22: The reviewer felt that significant portions of your article were copied directly from the source. Everything you post on Wikipedia must be written in your own words, not copied or even closely paraphrased. A quick shows several phrases and sentences that seem to exactly match that PDF. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 16:56:19, 27 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Lifeisbtrswt[edit]


I submitted an article on a notable person, David Grizzle, and it was first recommended that I add more citations/references (which I did) and then just today was rejected, apparently, for copyright material. I am trying to access the article to review for which text was in question but can't seem to access it. I wrote the article myself and though based the info on verifiable, third-party information I did not intentionally copy/steal anything from anyone.

I'd appreciate help in accessing the article--all the hard work I'd put in already to cite throughout--so I can make any necessary changes and resubmit.

Thank you.

Lifeisbtrswt (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Lifeisbtrswt, the draft was deleted by an admin so that Wikipedia would not be hosting copyright violations. However, you can file a request at WP:REFUND for an admin to email you the code for your draft, so you can make modifications to it to remove any copyright material and re-post it.
I appreciate that you did not intend to misappropriate any material, it's just our admins and bots are very sensitive to copyright issues, so we have a "better safe than sorry" policy on deleting them. While you're working to fine-tune your draft, take a glance at our guideline WP:Copyright which has some suggestions on how to avoid unintentionally over-using a copyrighted source. Hope this helps and you can get a smooth draft back into the review line. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

January 28[edit]

06:39:30, 28 January 2015 review of submission by Reethulingam[edit]


Reethulingam (talk) 06:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Hi Editor,

I wanted to know whether the article is declined or in hold for review. I have updated citation as per guidelines and kindly let me know on any other additions in article. Reethulingam (talk) 06:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Reethulingam: Your submission is awaiting a re-review. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
@Reethulingam: Symbol declined.svg Declined The draft reads more like a business index than an encyclopedic entry. One mention in The Financial Express doesn't make the case for notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

17:41:29, 28 January 2015 review of submission by Mtchong[edit]


Hi, I contributed an article and noted that the article title does not match the body copy. How can I get the title modified? It should read "IoT Data Service Exhange as mentioned in the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IoT_Data_Exchange MTchong (talk) 17:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Mtchong: Your article has been merged into Internet of Things. You can continue to contribute by improving that article. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

18:11:04, 28 January 2015 review of submission by Cameron Cunningham[edit]


Hi there friendly wiki gods. I'm so frustrated. I've tried rewriting an re-editing this draft so many times and each time, I wait weeks only for it to be rejected again. I believe I am providing good solid references and the company is very notable due to the fact that they were one of first of its kind. Please help! At a loss as to how I can improve it yet again.

Cameron Cunningham (talk) 18:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Cameron Cunningham: Wikipedia doesn't judge notability based on how important a company is or whether it was first of its kind -- it judges it based on significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article. This means that you need to find significant coverage of the company itself, not just a directory listing or an article that just mentions the company. That coverage needs to be in a reliable source, which means a source such as a newspaper with an editorial policy or a book by a recognized expert in the field, not a blog or a website that accepts user submissions of content. That content also needs to be independent of the company, so it can't be affiliated with the company OR a story based on a press release or interview. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

18:15:19, 28 January 2015 review of submission by Cameron Cunningham[edit]


Is there something kooky going on with the articles to be reviewed number? I submitted this article weeks ago and I see it's still pending review and also, the number to be reviewed shifts from over 2000 to under 2000 to over 2000 again and I'm checking back in regularly. Surely they are all in a queue together.

Cameron Cunningham (talk) 18:15, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Cameron Cunningham: Articles aren't necessarily reviewed in order. Depending on the complexity of the article, the category that the subject fits in to, and how clear-cut the case for acceptance or rejection is, the review process may take anywhere from days to as long as 4-6 weeks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

22:05:05, 28 January 2015 review of submission by CeeCeeL81[edit]


Hello, I was trying to submit my page of a book called The Power of Will. but it got rejected because the page is already exist but there were no page of it and I can find it. Please help me check again. Thank you very much.


CeeCeeL81 (talk) 22:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

The mainspace article The Power of Will was deleted on 18 December 2014 because it failed to demonstrate that the book is independently notable. Your draft also fails to prove notability as you have only a single reference which does not seems to be an independent reliable source. You need to find (and reference) review articles about the book that have appeared in the mainstream media such as newspapers, magazines or literary journals. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

January 29[edit]

09:58:15, 29 January 2015 review of submission by Trevorwills5[edit]


Trevorwills5 (talk) 09:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


09:58:15, 29 January 2015 review of submission by Trevorwills5 {{Lafc|username={{Trevorwills5}|ts=09:58:15, 29 January 2015|link= }}

Hi I have had my article refused for copyright reasons, but I am completely confused as I wrote it myself. I am unable to check what was wrong because it has been deleted. Where do I go from here? How do I know what I did wrong?

Hello Trevorwills5, when you say that you wrote it yourself, have you perchance ever posted the same content on any other site? If, for example, you wrote an article at "trevorwillis.com" and later posted much the same text on Wikipedia, our 'bots would flag it as a copyright violation of "trevorwillis.com" since we can't simply assume you are indeed that person.
Did you copy-paste from anything already existing on the internet? That might be a reason. In whatever case, to get a copy of your draft back, file a request at WP:Refund and it will be emailed to you. But before putting the text back up on a Wikipedia Draft page, you need to figure out what about it is matching up exactly with some other website; check on Google if necessary. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

10:54:52, 29 January 2015 review of submission by ZRay22[edit]

Hi guys, I submitted this but was told that it may be a copyright violation of this document here: http://www.brad.ac.uk/library/media/library/specialcollections/documents/CwlPTCCLDApr2010.pdf

I emailed the archive who responded back with the following:

"We write these documents to publicise our archives so that people will use them. We therefore license others to use them under creative commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. In other words, providing you acknowledge us as your source, we are happy for you to quote from our document in your Wikipedia entry."

I'm not sure this helps my case at all. Would the article still have to be edited before submitting again? If so, just et me know and I'll get right on it :)

ZRay22 ZRay22 (talk) 10:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello ZRay22, nice work reaching out to the Archive! There's one more step though: for Wikipedia to properly verify that they are truly releasing the text, they need to send an email from an official brad.ac.uk/library email account making a formal statement to this effect. This is so Wikipedia can specifically note and file a legitimate CC license release. The instructions for sending said email are here: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
It is an extra step, but rest assured this is because we take copyright very seriously, so hopefully the Brad.ac.uk folks will understand we're being this thorough because we respect their rights and want to make every effort to ensure we're in-step with international copyright law. Hope this helps, and that you can work with them to knock out that quick email and move forward. Note that once they're in the process of filing that release, you can re-post your draft, but ensure you mark it as "license pending" with the "otrs pending" coding shown at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Let us know if you have any trouble. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Matthew, are you sure CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 is acceptable? I am still somewhat uncertain about these types of things, but my concern is prompted by its including "NC" which I've previously seen used to stand for "Non Commercial" which is not OK for Wikipedia. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 07:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Pinging @MatthewVanitas: just in case this hasn't been seen. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

16:11:30, 29 January 2015 review of submission by Dorraldavis[edit]


Dorraldavis (talk) 16:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Not sure how to ask a question but hopefully this works. I resubmitted my prior information regarding the initial use of the term dekatherm and cited the orders that approved the initial filing by Texas Eastern. I have copies of the old orders but I am not aware of any data base that can be linked by the average person. Please let me know if I need more. Just trying to help out an old friend and am not good with technology. Thanks. Paul Davis

@Dorraldavis: Please read our requirement for verifiability. There are sources like this from FERC that verify Dth is a unit of measurement equivalent to a million BTUs. The problem is that your draft makes a bunch of other un-verified and un-notable claims. Sources don't have to be websites, but they would have to at least be newspapers, magazines, and books that an editor could go to a library to check. I would recommend you instead develop this information at Therm, which makes a mention of dekatherms. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Paul, came here to say pretty much was Chris is saying. For any given fact, if you can't point to it being attested by some neutral and credible party (newspaper, academic article, etc), then you cannot include it. If you happen to have a ton of personal knowledge of Texas Eastern and want it to be in the public record, then you would have to be interviewed for an book or article about natural gas physics/history, and that book/article published. That way there's a series of checks (journalist/academic bounces your claims off others, applies scientific method, does their own research, publisher fact-checks) before the fact is "established". One can't simply establish facts by posting on Wikipedia and saying "I MatthewVanitas lived in Doha, Qatar in 1996 and personally saw this event"; that's simply not verifiable without a credible neutral party's involvement.
Fundamentally, we do need an article which notes that a Dekatherm exists and the term is widely used, but you cannot claim that Texas Eastern created the term unless you have a newspaper/academic article which says "hey, interesting thing is that the first people to invent the term were Texas Eastern employees in 1972" or whatever. Make sense? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

21:26:10, 29 January 2015 review of submission by AreejS22[edit]


I have created a Wiki Article as a Draft, it is now ready and I want to move it to the live space. How can I do this? It says I must wait potentially up to 3 weeks for my article to be reviewed and published. Can an experienced editor please review my article and speed up the process, or give me instructions on how I can move the article to the live article space.

Thanks, AreejS22 (talk) 21:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@AreejS22: Symbol declined.svg Declined You can't simply copy text from other websites. Wikipedia assumes everything is copyrighted even if the source doesn't assert copyright unless it's specifically labeled Creative Commons or public domain. Further, phrases like "has come to represent the best in international translation" is promotional nonsense. Finally, the publisher wasn't notable seven years ago and still isn't notable now. I blanked your draft but I didn't nominate it for deletion so you can start over from scratch. In closing, I'm glad I could speed up the process for you; I'm sure you are. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

21:53:17, 29 January 2015 review of draft by Hephzibah Yohannan[edit]


I'm starting a new page and I'm really struggling with creating citations. I just want plain ones that go to the next number each time. It's ages since I did any writing or editing and it's really giving me a headache. I can see how to put the numbers in - [1] - I think that's right - but funny things are going on at the bottom of the page. I can't make head nor tail of the "Help:Footnotes" page, I'm not used to coding and I'm going cross eyed! Sorry! Hephzi (talk) 21:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Hephzi (talk) 21:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

References
  1. ^ 1
@Hephzibah Yohannan: Fixed it for you. All you do is put the citation between the ref tags. The coding will automatically number them. Should you want to use a source more than once you'll use ref name instead of just ref. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
@Chris Troutman:Many thanks for your help. Hephzi (talk) 15:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

22:31:09, 29 January 2015 review of submission by Fresnowalldog[edit]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fresnowalldog I don't quite understand why my submission was rejected on the basis of "verifiable" It has been on the TV, Radio, and the Fresno Bee Newspaper, and the Fresno Business Journal to name a few. Do you need copies of any of the things I have mentioned? If at all possible could you explain more what you would need? Respectfully, FranCisco Vargas Fresnowalldog (talk) 22:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Fresnowalldog: An article being verifiable means that the reader can easily verify the information presented. We can't just take your word for it, you have to provide a proper citation (even if it's an offline source) for the information you present. Please see WP:V for more information. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 23:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
To follow up on that, Wikipedia:Citing sources is a good guideline to glance at. Like yourself, often folks say "But my topic has been covered in X, Y, and Z!". If so, that's great, but you have to show us that it's been covered, and that its facts have been established, by stating a fact and then cititing said fact to a place a reader could go. If it was painted in "1975" or whatnot, and the Fresno Bee verifies that date, when you say "1975" make sure you cite the Bee. That way any reader wondering "hmmmmm, was it really 1975?" only has to click your footnote and go "huh, yup, the Bee confirms it was 1975". Without a clear footnote, all your reader has is "some guy on the internet said...". All good? MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

22:43:36, 29 January 2015 review of submission by AnnRos[edit]


AnnRos (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I wrote a new article about Adrienne Haan https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adrienne_Haan&action=edit&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro

I received an email today saying the article was rejected because it contains copyrighted material. Can anyone tell me which part they thought was copyrighted? I know we are saving a spot for a photo and the photographer sent a request in to wikipedia giving the release, and we have not posted the photo. There's also some articles used as citations. Are those the problem?? Here's the email I received, any help will be appreciated:

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work. The existing submission may be deleted at any time. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.

If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors. (t) Josve05a (c) 17:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@AnnRos: There were no copyright infringement issues identified with Adrienne Haan. The notice you received was about the page that used to be located at User:AnnRos/sandbox which was copied from http://www.windsorsymphony.com/musicians/musicdirector.html --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 23:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

January 30[edit]

06:25:27, 30 January 2015 review of submission by Quatticapic[edit]


The draft of DARK (film) is intended as a new film page. The format of the typical film page seems to be laid out in a very specific way. How may I improve this article and create it as a proper film article with Plot, Cast, Crew, Production Notes, etc. Please advise. Thank you. Quatticapic (talk) 06:25, 30 January 2015 (UTC) Quatticapic

Quatticapic (talk) 06:25, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

@Quatticapic: Worry more about content right now, formatting can be dealt with later. That article would currently be rejected if reviewed as is because it doesn't show that the film is notable. Please carefully read over WP:NFILM and add citations to significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

09:08:04, 30 January 2015 review of submission by 212.91.237.209[edit]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I wrote an article about a company myDriver. Unfortunatelly, the Reviewer has declined my article on the basis that is looks more like an advertisement and my sources are taken mostly from the subject being discussed.

It is my first article, part of my University task. I based on the article about a company DriveNow, where sources are also taken from the company's website.

May you help me with some advices what exactly should be changed in order to post my sumbission?

Best regards, Marcin Kusyk

212.91.237.209 (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Marcin , the article DriveNow had way too much material sourced to the company's own website, so not a good model to follow. Since you've pointed it out, I've trimmed the article back greatly. An article about a company should be nothing like an "About Us!!!" page, so DriveNow was not appropriate as it was. As a general rule: if there is a given Fact X, and nobody outside the company has bothered to comment on Fact X, that means that Wikipedia doesn't care about Fact X and there's no point putting it in the article. We care about facts that an independent authority would find worth remarking on. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

10:15:28, 30 January 2015 review of submission by Sebh007[edit]


Hi there. I need some help and advice please.

I have stumbled across something which I think should be in Wikipedia but I am having a problem convincing reviewers that it is sufficiently notable to warrant inclusion. It is something called The National Open Art Competition (NOAC) which is the largest in the UK - even bigger that the one at The Royal Academy apparently. It has been running for about 20 years and isn't in Wikipedia at the moment.

So, before I started to write any drafts, I looked round Wikipedia to see what was similar mechanically, and I found the BAFTAs which are similar, albeit much more notable, I admit. So, the BAFTA entries consist of a main page about BAFTA and then a page covering each year that the BAFTAs have been awarded and a page for each of the BAFTA awards, so there's a page for 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 etc. and separate pages for each of the best actor and best film and best director etc. So, I have started to draft something similar for the NOAC and so far two of my pages have been reviewed and both rejected for lack of notability.

After the first rejection, I emailed the people who run the NOAC and asked them if they have any independent reviews or articles about the NOAC and they sent me a bunch of stuff which seems relevant in terms of establishing notability - reviews in various newspapers and magazines and on the BBC etc, but I'm a bit green as far as this stuff is concerned and I'm not sure how to use it. It is not really adding factual material such as you might for a learned academic article, so I can't really use it as a conventional reference and I obviously don't want to create irrelevant body text just to be able to refer to it. Art, by its very nature is very subjective, and so the independent references are almost exclusively expressions of opinion and not fact.

Please can anyone suggest how I can best demonstrate the notability of the subject while keeping to both the spirit of the editing Guidelines? I could, of course, ditch the subsidiary pages, that is the Annual pages and/or the individual Award pages and pull them back into the main page, but I thought that would make it unwieldy. On the other hand, demonstrating notability for the subsidiary pages is more difficult than for the currently shorter main page just because there's less material. So, I can make the main page unwieldy and more notable and lose the subsidiary pages or keep the subsidiary pages but risk them being rejected for being insufficiently notable.

All input most welcome!


Sebh007 (talk) 10:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 19:48:22, 30 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 74.213.198.200[edit]


Hello! I am currently attempting to create an article for a musician/performer/educator from the Bay Area. I have learned so much from Wiki's tutorials. Awesome. I recently received a message saying that my article has been denied due to copyrighted information. It was not my intention to include any copyrighted information. Is there any way I can receive some guidance as to which material has been copyrighted so that I can remove/replace it?

Thank you.

74.213.198.200 (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

20:58:23, 30 January 2015 review of submission by Bjoertvedt[edit]

This article has been up for review for some time, and I have tried to brush up this article with relevant information, third-party sources, and a photo. I believe this article should be both notable and wikified by now. Have waited more than 3 weeks for review, but the first reviewer does not seem to respond. Can anyone have a look at the draft and review?

Bjoertvedt (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

22:27:08, 30 January 2015 review of submission by Ahmed Ragab Amin[edit]

I wrote an article on LinkedIn then put it on wikipedia, why it is deleted ? although I am the owner of this article. Ahmed Ragab Amin (talk) 22:27, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


January 31[edit]

Just wrote an article and not sure what is the next step towards getting it published[edit]

Currently there is a page for Conservation grazing that include a hotlink to targeted grazing but I am requesting the creation of a separate page for Targeted grazing. Targeted Grazing is the application of a specific kind of livestock at a determined season, duration, and intensity to accomplish defined vegetation or landscape goals. Conservation grazing focuses solely on increasing biodiversity. If anything, conservation grazing is a sub discipline of targeted grazing. How can I make targeted grazing a stand-alone Wikipedia page?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by David.Toledo.p (talkcontribs) 00:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Clarification: Targeted grazing currently WP:Redirects to Conservation grazing. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 02:55:16, 31 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Thaiso[edit]


I have just had an article on Deep Ocean Minerals rejected because it used 'copyrighted information'. However I do not understand what they mean. The information provided is fully referenced so this claim is very odd. Please can the reviewer be more clear as to what they perceive as copyrighted information? Thanks Thaiso

Thaiso (talk) 02:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

03:37:19, 31 January 2015 review of submission by Schradieck[edit]

My article was not accepted because there would seem to be copyrighted information in the article. I was very careful about providing footnotes for the statements and am not aware of having included copyrighted material. It would be helpful to know what material that was. Also, I meant it to be a biographical entry under the name "Mark Peskanov" but when I pasted the request to have the article reviewed and saved, it went right to the reviewer under its current rubric as my sandbox. Also, I thought the sandbox was not live online, but it appears in my google searches. How can I experiment and develop an article without it being online? Thanks. Schradieck (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

18:52:47, 31 January 2015 review of submission by Mvmteacherli[edit]

Please translate this page into english for english-speaking audiences Mvmteacherli (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done

They're referring to de:Peter J. Moloney. Mvmteacherli, this is not the place to request translations. For that, see Wikipedia:Translation. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 23:28:04, 31 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Nikkolasd.12345[edit]


I am asking asistance for my article I am creating to fix copyrighted materials on the article.

Nikkolasd.12345 (talk) 23:28, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Request on 16:01:55, 1 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by MichaelSunBeijing[edit]


I have created my very first wiki page and submitted it for revew. The response that I recieved was that the article does not meet minimal standards for citation not sure what exactly it means How should I edit my citations? thank you heaps for your help! Michael Sun

MichaelSunBeijing (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)