Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)ShowcaseParticipants
Apply — By subjectReviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives

Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

• This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
  • For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
  • Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
• Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
• Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.

Ask a new question Please check back often for answers.

• Top of page
• Table of Contents
• Today's posts
• Bottom of page

May 27

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FileSick

helllo

my article has been declined moment ago and i received a notification message just now but i don't know the reason why so if you can please let me know what happened and how to fix it please

waiting for your respond — Preceding unsigned comment added by FileSick (talk • contribs) 00:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Draft:FileSick was declined for the reasons given in the pink box at the top of that page. Click on the links in the decline reason for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:42, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:John Morris Anglin

What is the best way to insert a .jpg photo into my article. I clearly see the "Insert" and photo symbol, and using that does insert the position of the photo . . . but how do I upload the photo so it will appear in the article . . . or how do I instruct the program where to find that specific photo to upload?

Michael Anglin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwanglin (talk • contribs) 02:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

@Mwanglin: Wikipedia:Images lists how to updload images. Please make sure the images you upload are appropriate to the Image Policy. Hasteur (talk) 13:15, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name hereNeil Harrap

Someone had placed material about me on Wikipedia that was very incomplete so I've endeavored to update it. I have provided links to the NY Times, CNN, NBC, Jeremy Clarkson at BBC, TripAdvisor, etc. Are they not sufficient? Neil 203.79.104.117 (talk) 04:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Neil, thank you for adding these sources. I have removed the "blp prod" deletion template from the article, because the article cannot be deleted under that process when reliable sources exist. There are still numerous issues with the article, as described by the other templates that are still there. Hopefully these issues can be fixed in due course. It is recommended that you avoid editing the article directly, instead you could provide further sources, information and corrections on the talk page at Talk:Neil Harrap. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:09, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Mineral & Gem International Show

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hugopottier Heyo, I just would like to know how long it takes to have a review ? I don't know if my article is at the right place... I made my article about "Mineral & Gem International Show" Hugopottier (talk) 07:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Hugo. Your draft article is at the right place. The review process is currently severely backlogged, so it could take a very long time to be reviewed; possibly more than a month. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. :)

Hugopottier (talk) 07:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Hugopottier:  Declined. I've already spammed your talk page, but please read WP:RS, WP:GNG, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Chris Troutman (talk) 08:02, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Virtual personal trainer (May 26)

Hi, I am seeking help having my phrase approved. Your submission at Articles for creation: Virtual personal trainer (May 26) What is my next step? Thank you. Duncanmt (talk) 13:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Duncan. Draft:Virtual personal trainer was rejected because the reviewer believed the information would be better contained in the existing article Personal trainer, as noted on the draft page itself. I also noticed that at least one of the sources you provide is not about the topic that the draft purports to address. I'm not wholly sure of the next step, but how would you feel about adding information to that existing article instead? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Dpanic/sandbox

Dear,

I am writing english article on page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dpanic/sandbox

There is also article in Serbian language here: https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhan_Draga%C5%A1

I need help with uploading pictures, as I understand they're already on Wikipedia Serbian edition.

Also There is some issue with referencing, should I remove references to non existing pages?

Regards,

dolphin (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

@Dpanic: The image on the Serbian language Wikipedia can be uploaded at the file upload wizard. Your submission (as well as the SR Wiki article) lack references and fail WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:32, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Dojie's Law

Trying to get this up on your site, but I keep getting a message saying that it's not submitted for review, no matteer how many times I submit it for review. Help??

I have a lot of information to add regarding the history, additional title listings, etc.

How can I submit this for review when submitting it for review does not actually submit it for review????

Now I am getting warning messages on how I am submitting this to the page, and a referral to the help dask. I thought this WAS the help desk!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.177.172 (talk) 18:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

@76.105.177.172: First, your entry is submitted for review. Be aware that WP:NOBODYCARES. I understand a dog in Oregon got beat by an animal control officer and some Oregonians want to pass a law to criminalize that behavior but Wikipedia is not here to advertise that proposal. Furthermore, I'm not convinced despite the news coverage of the dog beating that the proposed law itself is notable. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

May 28

Review of Draft:Katie Howard

Hi,

I am working on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Katie_Howard, and I am not sure how to create a page that is unique of the other Katie Howard pages, as she is notable in her own right as a mixed martial artist. Any help would be great. Thanks. Corporatemonster (talk) 02:54, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Corporatemonster: Your submission has been submitted for review so you don't need to create another page. Your submission appears to fail WP:MMANOT although a case could be made for passing WP:GNG based on mentions in the Clackamas Print. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

What about the Portland State Vanguard newspaper articles? It is a university newspaper with an editorial board, and has recently received awards for journalistic excellence.

With this in mind, would she not have 2 credible sources that are not just routine coverage? With that in mind, I am unable to find whether a university newspaper (from a ranked university as per Forbes? Is there also a way that I could weigh in once considerations are being made? I noticed on WP:N that it is not necessarily a popularity contest,and that someone can be considered exremely interesting based on coverage in the media, and thus be worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. I would argue that Katie Howard meets these parameters, I would just hate for someone to look and see that she has not fought in the UFC or Bellator yet and dimiss her without taking everything into consideration. Corporatemonster (talk) 17:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As I said, there's a case to be made. Wikipedia doesn't have a list of reliable sources. I don't know if a university newspaper (regardless of which university) is ever considered reliable. Determinations of this sort are made at WP:RS/N. I didn't accept or decline your submission because it could go either way. WikiProject MMA tends to favor fighters that have been in top tier promotions and I defer to them. I tagged the draft's talk page with the WPMMA banner to encourage their attention. You might contact them at the WikiProject's talk page. Since Katie Howard may potentially fight in the UFC someday, this draft can be steadily improved until she reaches that top tier. I wouldn't oppose another reviewer from accepting this draft on the basis of general notability. As for being "extremely interesting", I don't recall Katie being mentioned on Inside MMA or Womensmmaroundup, so I'm not so sure that applies. Wikipedia is based on sourcing, anyway. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep in mind that passing GNG overrules all SNGs, or in other words, an SNG cannot be more restrictive than GNG. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Symphony Analytics

Hello. I recently submitted a piece on Symphony Analytics. The piece was speedily deleted. What changes or additions do I need to make to get the article accepted? Grateful for any advice. I will gladly resubmit the text for comment.

PaulinSweden (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)PaulinSweden

I can't see the article that was deleted. However, you may wish to resubmit it under Articles for Creation by using the Wikipedia:Article wizard. This may mean that it is less likely to be speedily deleted as overtly promotional. Remember to focus purely on concrete facts about the organisation. Be aware that the organisation is only likely to be suitable for a Wikipedia article if it meets the requirements of Wikipedia:CORP; and also that you should not copy and paste material from the company's own website. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@PaulinSweden: As Dewritech noted on your talk page, your submission was overtly promotional. Read WP:REFUND to ask about getting your content restored into your user sandbox. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Chris. This is very useful. I'll give it a try. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulinSweden (talk • contribs) 17:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Importance of Digital Marketing

Dear Help Desk,

We submitted article may 5th on 22nd May we got the following msg..

Hello! Emerchantacademy, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:57, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

please let us know the reason for declined ,,,,

Regards e-merchant academy

Emerchantacademy (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Your article was declined because it did not cite any reliable sources, which are required to know that what you write is acceptable and important, and because we already have an article on digital marketing. Who is "us"? You should only use one account per person. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

How do I re submit an article?

I can't find the re submit button. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannahro95 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

That is because you removed the template on the page, including the refusal notice and explanation, when you began editing the copy again. I'll put the original notice back on the page so you can use the resubmit button. FYI, it's best to leave the article's history intact, including any notes from editors, as it greatly assists other editors in reviewing. Hope that helps. Libby norman (talk) 13:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Add Jessica Utts' review to balance Hyman

Russell Targ's bio page. There is a very negative quote from Ray Hyman's part of the AIR report criticizing my research. The other half of the AIR report was very favorable to my work, and it doesn't appear. I think that a an encyclopedia should be fair and balanced should include both parts. Jessica Utts is a statistics Professor at the University of California, Irvine, and is president of the American Statistical Association. In writing for her part of a 1995 evaluation of our work for the CIA, she wrote: “Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted.… Remote viewing has been conceptually replicated across a number of laboratories, by various experimenters, and in different cultures. This is a robust effect that, were it not such an unusual domain, would no longer be questioned by science as a real phenomenon. It is unlikely that methodological flaws could account for its remarkable consistency.” Torgownik (talk) 16:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Russell

Yo Russell. That's not an article for creation or a draft article, and is thus outside the scope of this project and this page. I suggest trying Talk:Russell Targ instead. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of smile foundation india

Greetings!!!

Can you please tell me the reason why our article submitted is declined??

Regrads — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flaircommunications (talk • contribs) 16:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Flaircommunications: I find it odd that you ask about "our" article. You have claimed to be an individual and that doesn't seem true. Please read the notices about why your submission was twice declined. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:21, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sergei Varshavsky

I was informed that my article about a writer and art collector Sergei Varshavsky was declined. I assume that the reason was that the person I am writing about has the same name as myself. Hence, the article is not about myself but about my grandfather, who's books were published in many languages in Russia and abroad, and who's collections currently reside in world famous museums such as The Hermitage. Please reconsider rejection. Thank you, Sergei Varshavsky Svarshavsky (talk) 17:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Svarshavsky: This entry was obviously copied from the Russian language Wikipedia article. The problem is that you copied the plain text of the article rather than the code causing you to miss the original references and include meaningless footnote markers. The original Russian article relies too heavily on Varshavsky's work and lacks independent third-party reliable sources, anyway. Finally, your submission fails to meet WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG, or WP:ANYBIO. More research will need to be done before this is ready. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:The Lugar Center

The submission for The Lugar Center has already been reviewed once and transferred from user space to draft space. Is there any way to ensure it gets a second review and moved into main space? It has been over a month since the article was submitted for review.Krh4000 (talk) 19:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Krh4000:  Declined Your submission has only one independent source. Based on your edits, you appear to be an eager staffer or a paid editor. Try the reward board to find an independent editor to fix this for you. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

May 29

Review of Draft:EUROPEAN International School Ho Chi Minh City (EIS)

Please let me know why my article has not been accepted.

Richard Muden (talk) 01:32, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Richard Muden: Your submission needs to conform to WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG. Also, you have no independent reliable sources. Please also read WP:NSCHOOL. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Pranavtat09/sandbox

how to change my user name pranavtat09 to Pranav Kumar Singh.can u provide Detail procedure of that.

@Pranavtat09:  Declined See WP:CHU to change your username. See WP:AUTO, WP:NOT, WP:COI, and WP:RS about your sandbox article. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:52, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Qlick

Why it has not accepted the article I submitted? Can you specify the areas that need improvement?Smilecathy (talk) 05:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Smilecathy: As indicated, the submission is written like an ad and it lacks both reliable sources and any claim to notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hello, I am writing with respect to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Laura Baird Last week we submitted an article on Laura Baird. It was deleted due to "copyright infriengement", but the site which it allegedly copied, was in fact Ms. Baird's bio, which we provided for a conference she took part in. The Bio is original and was heavily revised for Wikipedia, but of course some of her projects and experience were "found". Ms. Baird is an Associate at our office and (by now) very accomplished, how can we submit this article so it will not be immediately rejected again? OMA AMO (talk) 11:10, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

If you own the copyright to the biography and wish to freely license it, instructions for doing so can be found at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. This would avoid the problem of it being deleted for copyright infringement. However, there would still be no guarantee that the material would be suitable as the basis of a Wikipedia article. It is important to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business directory or promotional site. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

• Once you have completed the donating process, you may be able to get it undeleted at WP:DRV. Good luck. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:42, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sinenjongo times

does it matter the type of article it is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by nkqusquared47 (talk • contribs)

@Nkqusquared47:  Declined Yes, it does. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:15, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

How to Re-submit an Article that has been edited?

How do I re-submit an article from the sandbox, that has been edited?— Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneyF (talk • contribs)

Hi JaneyF. If you are trying to resubmit User:JaneyF/sandbox, just put {{subst:submit}} at the top of it and then save the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:37, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Federal Health Architecture

I have tried updating the Draft:Federal Health Architecture/Nicole Keglerseveral times and it keeps getting rejected. The content on this page is to inform and be resource to people about this federal initiative. I have provided links to outside resources but, there isn't much public information available on the initiative. Please help me understand what needs to be included in this article in order to get it approved. Thank you.

Nicole Kegler Nkegler (talk) 19:11, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Nkegler: Your submission must meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP or both. If there isn't independent coverage then it's not notable and therefore not worthy of inclusion. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Patkelso/sandbox

I would like to post stuff from this site, http://www.webexhibits.org/about/legal.html, but cannot find copywrite bug requested by Upload Wizard. but site does say this: "Links & copies We invite you to link to any page. You can also copy or display this exhibit for noncommercial purposes, if you clearly credit Christopher Tyler, Michael Kubovy and WebExhibits. Legal details." Pat Kelso (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Pat. Wikipedia requires that copied content should be suitable for use for all purposes, not just noncommercial purposes, and therefore material from that site cannot be copied onto Wikipedia. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

May 30

Review of User:Imansoor/sandbox

can you let me know why the page is deleted actually?

One of competitors were able to publish it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LocalOye.com I did the same format with our brand and information. What is the actual reason removing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imansoor (talk • contribs)

@Imansoor: Yes, LocalOye.com is crap. I've tagged it and it may be deleted. Meanwhile, your entry was deleted by Deb only 20 hours ago for being obvious advertisement. Now you're trying again? Neither entry has reliable sources or a real claim to notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 07:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I've deleted LocalOye.com for advertising - why mess around? It appears neither user understands the wikipedia guidelines. Deb (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Jesse Faber

Hi,

I would like to know more about why my submission has been rejected in order to improve it. There are several referencing to external articles that make the information verifiable.

Thanks in advance. JesseFaber (talk) 11:04, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jesse. I went through your draft and formatted the referencing properly in order to be able to see what kinds of sources you were using. Simply adding inline external links in the article is not the correct way to reference. I completely removed all the YouTube links. (1) They are not considered valid references in this context, and (2) they are all copyright infringements. I also removed inline external links to other Wikipedia articles and the inline link to your own web site. So what's left? Very little that would indicate that the subject passes the criteria for inclusion as an article here. You were given links to read in the decline notice at the top of your draft. I strongly suggest you click on each of those links and read them carefully—all the way through. They will explain why most of your current references are useless for establishing that the subject meets the notability criteria and why some of them are even inappropriate for simply verifying the information in the article. You should also look at the alternative criteria for Creative professionals. Finally, I am assuming from your name that you are also the subject. Wikipedia strongly discourages writing articles about yourself or on subjects to which you have close connection, either personally or financially. Suggested reading Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. – Voceditenore (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:European Academy of Bozen

i understand why the article in march was rejected. Independent sources were missing. I added them and resented the question for review. After this, nothing happened, but the article was moved from Articles for creation to Draft. Without a comment. Can someone tell me what’s wrong about the article? Niuwörldorder (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Moving the submission from Articles for Creation to Draft (which was done by Rankersbo) means nothing; at the moment, we're trying to put some submissions in the Draft namespace since it (the namespace) was recently introduced.

The submission looks like it has a bunch of sources and will probably be reviewed, according to the banner at the top, sometime in the next month. Thanks! APerson (talk!) 20:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

thank you Niuwörldorder (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:LynxHungaricus/Ga-nime

I think I made some mistake but I'm not sure. When I made my draft, I pressed the "Submit your draft for review!" button. Then a new page appeared with only the content in the edit box saying I should not edit anything explicitly saying in that whole edit box just press the save button below. I did that, there was no warning that I may lose my article in the making... and now I can't find anything what I wrote. The yellow Review waiting window says "In the meantime, you can continue to improve this article by pressing the "Edit" tab at the top of the window" suggesting that what I see is not normal at all. If I did click the edit link, I'd just get the same edit box with the content do not change anything there. So... does my draft disappeared? I went to other drafts waiting to be accepted and most of them had the content in it, not just the yellow box. Do I have to recreate everything or is there a way to get back what I submitted for review?

LynxHungaricus (talk) 14:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

@LynxHungaricus: I moved your submission to Draft:Ga-nime. Your submission has no reliable sources, which cannot be allowed. You will also need to prove notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Edit: everything's proven reliably in the draft. Sorry for previous mistakes, I overlooked the fact that the main source has English site!

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KidCareCanada Society

Please advise why this submission was refused, and how I can change it.

Thanks. KatharineHolmes (talk) 16:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

@KatharineHolmes: Read the comments Timtrent left for you on the article. Please also read WP:TONE, WP:RS, WP:NOTADVERTISING, and WP:GNG. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:53, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Perspective projection

My edited "Perspective Projection Distortion," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Patkelso/sandbox was declined because it was deemed better to merge it into "Perspective projection," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_Projection#Perspective_projection. I would prefer to keep the former in my sandbox for reference but I would also like to edit and merge it into the latter via a sandbox. Can this be done? (I would appreciate a heads-up email, Kelso@coes.latech.edu, with link, of where I might find your reply.) Thank you.Pat Kelso (talk) 19:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. You would do so by editing Perspective projection.

You can reach me as demiurge1000.wikipedia@gmail.com and I hope that satisfies your requirements for replies. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Evidence and Case Studies for Agile Software Development Methodologies

How do I communicate with the editor who rejected my article? Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Evidence and Case Studies for Agile Software Development Methodologies Sarah M SarahMonsees (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

@SarahMonsees: While MatthewVanitas declined your submission, I can address your questions. Your first sentence: "When pursuing software or product development quality using Agile methodologies, there is Evidence and Case Studies for Agile Software Development Methodologies that Agile methods improve quality of the resulting products." is clear evidence you've written an essay. Please also read WP:NPOV. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roberta Joy Weir

I had my article Wikipediatalk:Articles for creation Roberta Joy Weir reviewed and turned down. I'd like to know what was wrong with the article; I believe the subject to have sufficient notability and verifiable references for publication. Thanks all for help & encouragement.P.g.duffy (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

You do have some reliable sources in the submission; however, Timtrent (aka Fiddle Faddle), who reviewed the article, thought (and I agree with him/her) that many of the statements in the article need citations, according to Wikipedia's verifiability policy. You should look carefully at Fiddle Faddle's comment, and try to address the remarks made in it. APerson (talk!) 20:18, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

@P.g.duffy: I do try very hard to give as clear a rationale as I am able. It was wise of you to come here to get further opinions. We're always pleased when editors come and ask for help, the more so when a review has been disappointing. If, after reading and acting on the elements of my comments you feel are appropriate, you have further questions please drop by my talk page or {{ping}} me here and ask. Be as specific as you can, please.

One thing I try not to do is a further formal review of the same article. Our system is more useful when further pairs of eyes look at a submission. Our objective is to help you to avoid deletion when your article goes live. That truly hurts. We don't always succeed, but we do a pretty good job. I include you in the "we". You are as much part of the team as a reviewer. Fiddle Faddle 22:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks guys; I do very much appreciate the encouragement and offers of help. I added a citation I'd been looking for for a month, but I suspect that in itself isn't really sufficient. I hadn't wanted to expand the article, rather, I had been paring it down...but I fear that more detail is needed. Roberta Weir is a woman who never sought notoriety, and managed to stay out of nearby spotlights like Jerry Garcia's, yet her effect on the culture has been profound in subtle ways (cf: her introduction of the Flammerion engraving to the masses in the 60's...). I'd like to keep working on this and making it worthy of publication.P.g.duffy (talk) 22:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mark Sheldon Ross

Hello, I have invited to contact by the OTRS team, now that permissions are in order for the new article below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mark_Sheldon_Ross What is next required before it can be published? Thank you EdouardGris (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I just submitted the draft; now, all you have to do is wait until one of the Articles for Creation reviewers takes a look at it; after they review it, they will leave a note on your talk page. So, you should check your submission periodically. Thanks! APerson (talk!) 20:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

EdouardGris: unfortunately, I had to decline it, because there is no evidence that he meets either WP:GNG, or WP:CRERATIVE--see the note on the submission. If you do have such references, add them and resubmit. DGG ( talk ) 19:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Narawa Games

I created the website in the article, but the site is not a popular one, so nobody knows it exists. That means there are no Internet sources available. How to I reference and cite it? The article is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narawa Games. 2601:E:2C00:44A:16C:AC93:1C2C:5937 (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Are there any printed books from well known publishers that mention it? Or printed magazines from reputable sources?

If there aren't any of these either, then it is too soon to make a Wikipedia article about this website.

Wait until the website is widely known. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

May 31

I can't change a band's main picture?

For the Family Force 5 page, the main band picture has not been updated since 2008 I believe. This band also got a new lead singer and drummer in September. It's been 9 months now and no one has uploaded a new picture with the new members. I do not see any way for me to change the picture. Is this because it's protected? Does that mean the old picture will stay on their page until the person who has it protected changes it? Also, is the person who actually submitted the page for the band the only person allowed to change the main band/profile picture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannahro95 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

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!) 20:15, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of [1]

Review of [2]

Hi!

I don't understand if the article i'm working on, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Martin_Haene is still pending for review by an editor or if I have to react in any way. Could you tell me that, please?

Thank you very much for your help and greetings,

FrS

FrS (talk) 07:53, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

@Sandro.friedrich: I think the problem was caused by removal of the notice declining the submission. This meant you lost track of what was going on. I have restored it. I will pop over to the draft and make some comments there. Please do not delete the boxes and comments declining things. They help you and future reviewers, and are removed on acceptance. Fiddle Faddle 13:28, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

@Sandro.friedrich: What you need to do now, should you choose to, is to look at comments made, consider what you will adopt from them, and, once you have, resubmit the article. This one does need a fair bit of work. Fiddle Faddle 13:39, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry King (tennis)

Resolved

 – Article was created. APerson (talk!) 19:54, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, my article was rejected about Barry King/tennis due to issues with the context of the article. Here is the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Barry_King_(tennis)

Thanks, any help appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Footer44 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of [Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&diff=next&oldid=610897325]

Hi! I got a message that an change had been made by an editor: "Wikipedia page Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk has been changed by Footer44"

Except all it displays is an article about tennis which doesn't have to do with me. Can you check this? Thank you!

Best,

FrS FrS (talk) 11:50, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

The diff which you linked to looks like you starting a post. I'm guessing that the notification system thought that Footer44, who started a thread right below you, was responding to your thread. APerson (talk!) 20:11, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Nate Fakes

Hello,

I was just curious to why the submission to include Nate Fakes was rejected and if there are any edits I can do to help improve it.

Thanks!

Jim AddamsJimboaddams (talk) 15:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

It looks like FoCuSandLeArN, who reviewed the submission, linked you to WP:ARTIST. It doesn't look like Nate Fakes meets that guideline yet. You may also want to focus on meeting WP:GNG, which doesn't cover artists specifically, by adding more reliable, independent sources about Nate Fakes as sources. You should cite phrases like "He is also known for his work". Although it is not required, since the submission contains multiple sources which focus on only one sentence in the submission (e.g. the "Knocking on Heaven's Door" mention), you should look at Citation Style 1. APerson (talk!) 19:53, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Nidhitanusri/sandbox

Why my article is rejectedNidhitanusri (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

As the two reviewers who looked at the submission said, your article needs more reliable sources so that the content in it can be verified.

Please re-submit the article only after adding some. Thanks! APerson (talk!) 20:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KKAnini

biography of auguste francois michaut thanks for creating the article but i do not understand why it appears in google search as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KKAnini/sandbox and not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auguste-Fran%C3%A7ois_Michaut how to change it? KKAnini (talk) 21:16, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

That's down to Google. Google will probably update itself in a few days. If not, you could ask for the redirect to be deleted. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

June 1

Review of Draft:Eliot Lewis (musician)Righttrack

I need help understanding what is an acceptable source for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Righttrack. According to one of your volunteers, an article in which a journalist or blogger interviewed Mr. Lewis is fine, but video of a TV interview in which a journalist asks him questions and he answers is not. The volunteer said that Mr. Lewis' answers have to be "substantially rewritten" before they can be used as a source. To me, as a former journalist, that seems odd. Also, I was told that to be a source, an article *must* be online. That may be a problem, since not all papers have all their entire article base online.

Thank you for your help!

Righttrack (talk) 00:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Who told you that sources must be online? Where did they tell you this? Whoever they are, they are 100% wrong.

As for the TV interview, one doesn't cite a piece of video footage that happens to be online somewhere; one cites the publication, i.e. the TV programme that it aired on.

Interviews are not great for proving notability, because they are mainly sources for what the person claims about themselves. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Rpenafiel/sandbox

Hi, I was wondering if my article was accepted or declined because it stays on my sandbox User:Rpenafiel and I have not received any other notes from editor. It does show on my "contribution" list but I'm not sure whether my content was accepted and published nor if rejected and needs further editing to be done to get accepted as Wiki content. Thank you very much.Rpenafiel (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

You were informed on your talk page that the submission had been declined. You reacted by removing the information about the reasons for it being declined, in this edit. Feel free to further improve the submission in accordance with the advice given. You can resubmit it by putting {{subst:submit}} on the submission page. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

A little more exactly, it was declined for being essentially a press release for a company with no references to support its notability , and both problems must be addressed; there is no point in resubmitting until you have done so. A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online. Without them, it will not be possible to write an acceptable article. Then, a Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release. Don't include material that would better belong in an advertisement or a web page, such as a detailed list of products or the personal motivation of the principals. Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients/purchasers/students/supporters/donors--that sort of content is considered promotional. DGG ( talk ) 17:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

A "thought trick" that I use when writing about companies and other organizations is to ask myself "Will anybody care about this 200 years from now, when the organization no longer exists and everyone with personal memories of it are long dead?" If the answer is a clear "no", it's probably not worth including. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Sean Erlston

The article has been declined but there is no explanation why. Wikipedia has an article/page about wedding photographers which can only have names listed if an article page exists about that photographer, which is why I made the page submission which has been rejected.How do you make a page, which is a prerequisite, without it being rejected?Sean Erlston (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia only needs biographical articles about people that are notable - see WP:GNG. Sadly, you are not yet notable by that standard. Reasons for an article being declined are almost always found on the page submitted. In this case that seems not to be accessible to you or to me - perhaps the submitted page was too overtly promotional (like spam) or perhaps it was a copyright violation by copying from an external website? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Sexton

Resolved

Hi there--just wanted to stop by and ask if there might be anything holding up review of this entry. I know the article review process is backlogged.

I originally started working on this article in Feb., have worked with a few volunteer Wiki editors, and want to make sure there's nothing missing before it gets to a reviewer. Thanks!

Theenglishmaven (talk) 15:14, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Theenglishmaven (talk) - I reviewed the article - made a few minor changes and added a ref to verify the biographical information in the article. I know it's been a while - thanks for your patience! Julie JSFarman (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Waterloo Busker Carnival

I believe this article is ready for publication. It is not "fictional"....not sure where that came from...and while the help is appreciated.....and I have done as asked....even to point out that the Waterloo Chronicle is a weekly newspaper as well as being on-line (like the majority of newspapers today). It's time to approve this and get it on Wikipedia. Thank you!DivaWord (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

It's been submitted for another review. Rankersbo (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Reviewed and accepted - it is now at Waterloo Busker Carnival. Congratulations! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2

Review of Draft:John Sutton Lutz

Hello. I've completed my draft of [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/JohnSuttonLutz] and am not sure how to activate it? Could you please advise. I'm clearly doing something incorrectly. KeithKeith Thor Carlson (talk) 00:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

 DoneYou hadn't finished the <ref> with a </ref>, so nothing after the broken reference worked, including your many attempts to submit. It's been fixed now. Rankersbo (talk) 10:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Yun Mu Kwan (karate)

I submitted an article called Yun Mu Kwan the other day from my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Swmirsky/sandbox and received a message as follows:

"This sandbox is in the Draft namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the template."

I don't understand what it is telling me to do. Can someone assist? Thanks.

Swmirsky (talk) 03:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC) swmirsky

Done. You just need to remove the template at the top of the draft. JSFarman (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Joe

In relation to the Article, I am the trademark holder and designer of Hottorque. Are you refering to the copright material as in from it being from Business Wire.

The stated comments in the business wire article are in true fact, as our company being the first to create a social media application with a Iphone App integration for the Automotive industry also we were the first Australian Tech Company to be a sponsor in a NASCAR sprintcup event.

So what do you suggest we create our own Article based on all the facts rather than the Business wire article

Also I would like to know how do we get this Article to main stream wiki?

Regards Laz Till CEO Hottorque.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by HtorqueMarketing (talk • contribs) 05:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the truth of the material was questioned. You can't use copyright material on wikipedia, even if you wrote it yourself. You must either compose new wording or formally and legally licence the material to wikipedia so the material can be reproduced and altered as any editor and reader sees fit. It's usually better to go down the re-write route as material composed for press releases tend to be too promotionally worded to work as an encyclopaedia article. Rankersbo (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Question

under what accounting entry is the battery use for wall clock — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.15.57 (talk) 06:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This help desk is only for editors seeking advice on their draft articles. For general questions, please go to Wikipedia:Reference desk. Voceditenore (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Liam.bertuzzi/sandbox

explain why my article was accepted please...Liam.bertuzzi (talk) 07:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Liam.bertuzzi, I assume you mean not accepted. The decline notice at the top of your draft explains the reason quite clearly, and given the content of your draft, I'm pretty sure you know perfectly well why it was declined. Voceditenore (talk) 10:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Incrediblehappenings01/sandbox

please why was my article decline? please get back to me.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Incrediblehappenings01 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Incrediblehappenings01, the decline notice and comment at the top of your draft explains why it was declined. Please read them and the linked pages you were given there. Voceditenore (talk) 10:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Directorate of Cooperation of Security and Defence

Hello everyone,

I've submitted an article 1 month ago, which still unvalidate... You can find it here (in the talk page) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Directorate_of_Cooperation_of_Security_and_Defence

Thanks in advance for any help,

--MelDCSD (talk) 13:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Please be assured that someone will review it. The delay is not on purpose, you know. Everyone who reviews articles does so when they can and when they want, and volunteers to do so. Hurrying volunteers is often counter-productive. Sometimes one wishes to review an article but finds one hasn't the expertise in the relevant area, so one passes on. Time is immaterial to Wikipedia, though. An article goes live when it is ready. No-one ever dies because of the lack of an article. Fiddle Faddle 17:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I see that it is a very close translation of the French WP article . Obviously, this is a good way to start an article here about a French organisation, but our practice differ somewhat from the practices there. I will review the article in a few hours, and tell you about the needed changes. (You are in my o[pinion very right to complain about the delay; it is the fault of our having insufficient good reviewers, and we must not be complacent about it) DGG ( talk ) 17:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses, I just wanted to be sure my draft was still in the actuality, take all the time you need to valid it dear volunteer, I wait your advices for the needed changes :)--MelDCSD (talk) 06:51, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Deanpowers/sandbox

Hello, I submitted an article on the "Quick Zope CMS"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deanpowers/sandbox

It was rejected for copyright violations because the content was taken from:

https://github.com/Zojax/QuickZopeCMS.

However, I was the author of the Github content since I am the CEO of Zojax (http://www.zojax.com).

Please tell me how to get this article approved.

Regards,

Dean Powers CEO, Zojax Group LLC

Deanpowers (talk) 14:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Deanpowers, I'm afraid it doesn't matter if you are the author or not. It was previously published on a page clearly marked © 2014 GitHub, Inc. Likewise the pages at zojax.com are marked © 2012 Zojax Group, LLC. If you own the copyright and want to donate the material for use of Wikipedia, the instructions are WP:Donating copyright material—you must follow them to the letter. However, it would be a complete waste of your time. Even if the text were copyright free, the draft is unacceptable on multiple levels as a blatant advertisement, e.g.

• QuickZopeCMS is a good choice for medium to large projects, providing an intuitive interface for managing the following types of content
• QuickZopeCMS is a powerful and flexible python web content management system and framework.
• It's built on Zope technologies to be very robust and flexible with pluggability in mind
• Contact: info@zojax.com

Before continuing any further with this, I strongly suggest you read WP:NOTADVERTISING, Wikipedia:Golden Rule, and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Voceditenore (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carlos Dews

Hello. I'm looking for help with my Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carlos Dews article. I have discussed it with the reviewer who declined it (Fiddle Faddle) and he sent me here. Our discussion is at User_talk:Timtrent#Carlos Dews. I need more help understanding why the listing of chapters/articles that show Dews's Carson McCullers expertise is too much. I have looked at the links Fiddle Faddle suggested as indices, and I don't see that they would showcase the McCullers well. Where else can I look for a listing without having everything Dews wrote show up?

As requested, to help with clarity, I will start reworking the page to remove the inlines in the article and the references. While waiting (nearly six weeks) for a review of the article, I kept clicking "Edit" to add more and more to 'improve' the article. I guess I went way overboard.

Any help is appreciated -- thank you! Oldbeeg (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Please never be concerned about doing too much. Doing too much is great! Doing too little, that is not so good. I'm glad you came here. Opinions other than mine are always useful. I may be incorrect, it has happened before, and I learn from that each time. We're doing something about the 6 week queue. There is currently a backlog clearance drive on. That is how we met. Fiddle Faddle 16:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The hours spent on research "doing too much" is not so great when that's apparently what got my article declined. I'm sure there're notability references in there, they're apparently hidden amongst the excess. <sad face> I need to figure out how much is excess. Oldbeeg (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The important thing is to ensure that you retain the references that have significant coverage about Dews, independent of him and in reliable sources. Then what you do is to consider the facts you assert in the article and make sure each of them is so referenced. Ignore the list of work for the present. It is the last thing you need to attend to. Read my comment in detail at the head of the article.

Please may we have other eyes on this? I have reviewed it as well as I am able, but, if I am not helping our new friend it needs others to look and offer help, too. Fiddle Faddle 23:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

hello please why does my recent submission has been declined?Raissa Damergi (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

thank you, Regards, Raissa

@Raissa Damerg: Your submission is at User:Raissa Damergi/sandbox and has been declined by MatthewVanitas because there are no references at all. The box at the top declining the article gives you lots of information about how to rectify this, and tells you with clarity why it has been declined However, I would encourage you to work in other articles and let this one wither on the vine. There is no evidence that this autobiography is of a notable person in our sense however much those who love you find you notable. Autobiographies hurt folk the most when they write them and submit them. Please consider this before proceeding.

If you proceed please be very aware that the article will never be accepted without strong references from significant independent coverage in reliable sources. Fiddle Faddle 23:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elementary Cycles

Hello

My article for submission has been rejected for publication for notability reasons. The article was motivated by the fact that among the interpretations of quantum mechanics the voice Elementary Cycles was one of the few without a dedicated article.

I have provided a list of published peer reviewed papers related to this interpretation. I think that it is sufficiently notable as, for instance, it has been awarded in the FQXi contest in 2011, voted by a large general public.

How can I improve the article?

N4tur4le (talk) 20:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The comment added by the reviewer linked to a WikiProject Physics discussion about your article. It received two comments: a brief comment linking you to WP:OR (without the link, of course) and a concurring comment. So, at this point, it looks like editors had two complaints about your submission:

• It counted as WP:OR, which is Wikipedia shorthand for a link to the policy No original research, which itself means that the two editors thought that your submission was about something—in your case, an interpretation in the field of physics—which does not seem to be confirmed by any extant reliable, published sources.
• It also did not meet WP:GNG, which is the "official" reason adopted by the Articles for Creation reviewer. You evidently understand it; however, I believe that what the reviewer meant to say was that your submission is characterized by very long stretches devoid of any citations to reliable sources.

Hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 00:25, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Como Brothers Band

Dear Wikipedia Help Desk, Please restore and create this page. This band is notable according to the Criteria for musicians and ensembles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles

According to the Criteria for musicians and ensembles A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria:

The Como Brothers Band has met the below notable criteria: 9 ) Has won or placed in a major music competition

    Fulfilled  -  Won Ernie Ball Battle of the Band 2012

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warped_Tour_2012#Ernie_Ball_Battle_of_the_Bands_16_Winners

10) Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E for further clarifications).

    Fulfilled by having music played worldwide on the below Networks

1)Movie - Wingman Inc. (performer: "Can I Be Matched With You?", "You Are My World", "What They Say")

2)E! Network 2013 Keeping Up with the Kardashians (TV Series) (performer - 1 episode)

                  Episode -  We're Having a Baby! (2013) (performer: "Can I Be Matched With You?"

3)Oxygen Channels 2013 Best Ink (TV Series) (performer - 1 episode)

                Episode - A Family Affair (2013) "Your Love")

4) MTV’s 2012-2013 The Real World (TV Series) (performer - 2 episodes)

           Episode - Bondage, Butts and Burlesque (2013) ... (performer: "You Are My World")
          Episode - Clean Break (2012) ... (performer: "You Are My World", "Can I Be Matched With You?")

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm6398859/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 http://www.mtv.com/artists/the-como-brothers-band-1/

I need help in correctly referencing The Como Brothers Band winning in two categories in The 2014 Artist in Music Awards (Composer of the Year and Album of the Year) http://www.allindiemagazine.net/2014/02/a-successful-3rd-annual-artists-in.html . Other artists that have Wikipedia pages reference these awards (see Katie Cole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katie_Cole

Thank you in advance for your help.

I am also providing the link to the original page deletion. It seems that the original cause for deletion was not notability but stated here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_129#The_Como_Brothers_Band

I feel that I am struggling against negative feelings about bands and music here. Please help

Marissa Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bco66209 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

While this may prove notability, your article still needs to be sourced by reliable sources. IMDB and Wikipedia cannot be used as sources (see WP:UGC). Moreover, the competition does not seem very "major", so it may still fail the notability criteria. Darylgolden^(talk) 23:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Canadian boxer Irish Eddie Carroll /Danny Doran Canadian hall of fame boxer

Hi,I have wrote this article of Canadian boxer Eddie Carroll,My Wikipedia user is Dannyboy 492 .I am trying to have this boxer's name added to the names of Canadian boxers in Canada . Canada's top JR lightweight for the Crown 1934,and Canad's top welterweight for the Canadian Championships..1935 Inducted to the Canadian boxing hall of fame[ Ottawa Ontario Canada] May 17 /1974. I need someone who can help Me enter His Name Thank You...Danny.[[[User:Dannyboy492|Dannyboy492]] (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)]

@Dannyboy492: This process is for new articles and your submission is not an article. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Senior Peer Counseling

My submission, "Senior Peer Counseling", was rejected because the editor said it read like an essay instead of an encyclopedia article. What is the difference? I do not understand how to correct my submission. Please help. Thank you!

Recordsmgr (talk) 22:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)Bob Milbourn Wikipedia talk:Articles for Creation/Senior Peer Counseling

@Recordsmgr: Not one of my more helpful reviews. My apologies. I suspect I managed to suffer from premature pressing of the submit button. The difference between an essay and an encyclopaedia article is a subjective "I know it when I see it one" and this does not help you at all. "Essay" is really a shorthand for "Needs to be substantially more concise, and the tone needs to be inspected to ensure it is neutral, flat, and factual." In addition essays are almost always light on referencing. My approach with this article would be to look at each sentence and ask myself "Does this sentence add value to the article?" and "Is this fact asserted i this sentence referenced properly from significant independent coverage in WP:RS?" A negative answer is your cue to cut. Finally I would ask "Is the tone now that of an encyclopaedia?" Our job is to be interesting but wholly neutral, factual but not bullet pointed, and always to be referenced in WP:RS. Fiddle Faddle 23:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:INTEGRIS

I just created a page for INTEGRIS Health that was rejected. I was hoping someone could tell me why it was rejected. INTEGRIS is the largest hospital system in Oklahoma and many of its individual centers have pages, so I'm confused as to why the organization itself wouldn't be substantial. I was hoping to create this page to unite the other pages of INTEGRIS and create a more comprehensive series of articles about INTEGRIS — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhitleyOConnor (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@WhitleyOConnor: It seems that it was not declined previously. I have now reviewed it, was unable to accept it, and have left you full details at the head of the article. I can;t see any other articles in your contribution history, and I am unsure why you consider that it had been declined previously. I hope you enjoy the extra research you need to do to get the article accepted. Fiddle Faddle 23:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@Timtrent I must have been confused. Someone sent me a message saying they saw that my article was rejected at the Articles for Creation before I posted this thread. I'm not sure why/how that happened. However, I have added a number of outside sources to bulk up the reference section as well as replacing some references from the entity the article is about to better legitimize the article. Thank you for the suggestions!

WhitleyOConnor (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@WhitleyOConnor: While awaiting your reviewer, please do the thing you missed: removal of inline URLs. I try very hard not to re-revioew an article. It is far better to have new eyes upon it, but it will not be accepted with the inline URLs in it. I will leave anything else to the next reviewer. Fiddle Faddle 17:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

June 3

Review of Draft:Studio Under

Hello. I've been told that my submission had been denied. I would be happy to understand what to improve/change so it would be accepted.

Best regards,

Eran Gal-Or — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.5.10 (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

We can't tell which article you are talking about, but the reasons are given in the centre of the pink box on the article, with links in there to pages that explain the various terms. Rankersbo (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, found it now. There are no independent, reliable sources to the article. There are lots of external links to the websites of various entities referrerd to in the article, which prove those entities exist and nothing more. The links don't say anything about Studio Under. You need references that talk about Studio Under, and the events and facts in your article. Rankersbo (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Katch 22

I have edited the article for the band Katch 22 many times and all of the information is correct and available to be checked on the internet, i.e.record release dates etc. Why is it not entered on the website. (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)). mike-Eastman (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)).

@Mike-eastman: Because this is what you submitted. What else could be done here?

Mike-eastman, it looks as if your draft had been deleted as an abandoned draft, a few hours before you tried to re-submit it. See [3]. To get it reinstated as a draft, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Good Katch, V. I should have spotted that. Fiddle Faddle 20:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UK Data Service

Hi there I've responded to the original reviewer's concerns about citations and updated the page, but I can't figure out how to re-submit it. Can you help? Many thanks. Scozzolino (talk) 13:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

You deleted the review templates and comments at the top of the page - I have just restored it. There is a big blue button in the pink template for resubmitting. Please do not delete any of the review stuff at the top of the page - it is the record of the progress of the draft and also has many links to advice and help pages. It is automatically removed when the article gets accepted, but until then it needs to be kept. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:GreenLips/Sandbox

Hi, y wife and I have been trying to post articles for wiki's review. Subject titled "Bill Haney". We have put probably 50hrs into trying to get this very worthy man listed. We keep getting deleted even through we are carefully following the many many many rules. We have submitted newspaper articles and a bio and it just keeps getting swallowed up - deleted with messages saying different reasons. The latest being "deleted: out of scope. Can someone please work with us? Thank you in advance to any one who tries to help us GreenLips (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: Submissions like yours are problematic. Your words above hint that you have a conflict of interest. I might suggest quitting this effort altogether.

That said, here are my comments: You'll need to add in-line citations for all your assertions. Much of that content (high school, personal life) is really not important enough to mention. Your subject doesn't appear to meet any subject-specific notability criteria so you'd need to make a case for WP:GNG. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: In answer to your questions at my talk page: Your file uploads can be found at Special:ListFiles/GreenLips. You uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which is a sister project. WP:CITE does not require that you provide scans of newspaper articles (File:SundayOaklandPress,1997.png, File:NYTimes,Apr1993.png, File:JacksonCitizenPatriot,Mar2002.png, File:Detroiter1990.png, and File:BirminghamEccentric,Dec1989.png), you only have to list which periodical, on what day, on what page, as well as the title and author. I'm sorry that was unclear to you.

When you use phrases like "very worthy man" and "someone who truly deserves it", it makes me doubt your objectivity. We are writing an encyclopedia; we're not here to celebrate heroes or condemn villains. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@GreenLips: : May I suggest Wikipedia:Mentorship? Fiddle Faddle 20:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Relativistic Global Non-Inertial Reference Frames

My recent;y submitted paper Relativistic Global Non Inertial Frames was declined for copyright violations. I would like to know which parts of the article the reviewer feels that there is too much overlap with published work ..

H Crater

Hcrater (talk) 14:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Hcrater. According to the deleting administrator, [4] it was an unambiguous copyright infringement from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.3257. That article appears to be co-authored by someone with a name similar to yours. Are you one of the authors? The problem is, even if you are the author and hold the copyright, if it has been previously published, then we cannot publish substantial chunks and/or paraphrases from it on Wikipedia unless it has been released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. I was unable to find anything to confirm what license it had been released under on either the article or its abstract page. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. – Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Hcrater: I was very specific in my comments but perhaps the submission was blanked before you could read them. You wrote a very technical paper hosted by Cornell University and recreated that content in your submission. I determined that fact by Googling random sentences in your submission. We value your contributions but we cannot host someone else's content. When using even public domain content, you must leave a clear notification that the content had already been published elsewhere. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2014 (UTCIt

((reply to Chris Troutman)) Yes, I am a coauthor with Lusanna on the arxiv paper paper you googled. Our article is a distillation of our arxive paper. Would it be possible to resubmit the article with this notification (i.e. that it is a distillation of the arxiv paper)? HCrater Hcrater (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hcrater , minimally you have to list the source(s) for any Wikipedia article, but a "distillation" (from what Chris says, the draft contained verbatim sentences, etc.) requires evidence that the paper has been previously published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Until that is in place, the draft cannot be restored. Voceditenore (talk) 16:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

((reply to Chris Troutman)) I have contacted the distribition arxiv for the purpose of finding the liscense

agreement all contributors agree to. The URL with the details is http://arxiv.org/help/license The particular portion of that agreement I believe relevent is... " In order to submit an article to arXiv, the submitter must either: •grant arXiv.org a non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article, and certify that they have the right to grant this license, •certify that the work is available under either the Creative Commons Attribution license, or the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, and that they have the right to grant this license, or •certify that the work is in the public domain (we will store this information by associating the Create Commons Public Domain Declaration with the submission)...."

Please let me know if this is sufficient to allow me to have my article restored to my sandbox for further editing that would explicitly state it is a distillation based on the arxiv article and any other necesssary editing you would recommend. Horace Crater Hcrater (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's not sufficient, Hcrater. You must provide proof that your article was specifically released either into the public domain (highly unlikely) or under the Creative Commons Attribution license. We do not accept the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, as all text on Wikipedia must be available for commercial use. This will probably entail an email from arXiv with a copy of the original submission which specifies the license. Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. Voceditenore (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Craig Henderson

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haileesettle (talk • contribs) 15:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Haileesettle . I have removed the copy of your draft which you had pasted in here. The link to it sufficient. Can you let us know what your question is or what sort of help you are seeking with the draft? Voceditenore (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Local 77 Duke Labor Union

Hi, I was just wondering if I could receive edits for my Wikipedia article on the Local 77 Labor Union. Thanks. Karenli2014 (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Karenli2014. What do you mean by "receive edits"? Are you asking for someone to help you with the draft? Or are you asking for a review? You have currently submitted it for a review (half an hour ago). Unfortunately, a review may take more than 3 weeks. The Articles for creation process is very highly backlogged. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Hexagon Geospatial

Hi,

There is a note on my talk page that the article I submitted, Draft:Hexagon Geospatial, was not accepted because it contained copyrighted information. I don't understand.

None of the text of the article is copyrighted. It does include copyrighted images - the Hexagon Geospatial company logo, for example. Is it possible for you to look back and see if it was rejected because of the copyrighted images? Or if there was something else in it the reviewers thought was copyrighted?

Aren't company logos normally copyrighted? If yes, then how do other people include them on pages they create for their companies?

The page has been deleted for me, but I am hoping you have a record of it somewhere.

Thanks, Slhuff (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Slhuff

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider checking out WP:REFUND. Hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 00:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Slhuff, According to the administrator who deleted the draft [5], it copied or closely paraphrased the text at http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/data-management-compression.aspx and other pages on that website. That website is clearly marked © Copyright 2014 Intergraph Corporation. As such, it will not be refunded. You will need to re-write the draft in your own words. But before you try that, I strongly suggest that you read:

• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

And if this applies to you, also read:

• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."

Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Rick Rosas

Hi, I am having difficulty with the submitted article on Rick Rosas. The references are confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey909 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mikey909: Please would you explain your rather large question in bite sized chunks? Before you do, please read WP:REFB in case it helps your thinking.

Remember that references are intended to corroborate facts you have asserted in the article. They must come from significant coverage independent of Rosas, and in WP:RS Fiddle Faddle 20:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Liam.bertuzzi/sandbox

I was woundering why my great important article didn't make it through and I would like the honest truth pleaseLiam.bertuzzi (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

To quote the comment left by the reviewer:

It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous over being factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time.

I think this more or less sums it up. APerson (talk!) 00:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Liam.bertuzzi. you already asked the same question here and received an answer yesterday [6]. Your behaviour and your "article" is disruptive and wasting everyone's time. Please stop it now. Voceditenore (talk) 07:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC

Hi there,

I'm new to posting on Wikipedia and am hoping to gain an understanding of what I can do/change to have my article published post rejection; Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC

Appreciate any/all help!

Best, schansler

Schansler (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Schansler. The reviewer left some good guidance and links for you on your draft. I'm assuming you haven't read them? In any case, please read the following which apply to all editors, and especially to ones who are writing about subjects with which they have an affiliation:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Voceditenore (talk) 07:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Fashionbi

Why my article was declined? Could you provide us with a better guidelines so we can post it correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fashionbi (talk • contribs) 23:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Fashionbi, did you read the reasons for the decline at the top of your draft, click on the guidance links you were given, and read them? Your draft was blatantly promotional and had no references whatsoever, let alone ones to independent reliable sources, e.g.

Fashionbi is an multicultural company, headquartered in Milan, Italy and Shanghai, China, which empower professionals to make smart decisions in the fashion and luxury industry.

The fact that you cannot even see how promotional and inappropriate the text is for an encyclopedia is a prime example of why Wikipedia strongly discourages editing with a conflict of interest. If you want some guides please read the following:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Please do not submit the draft again until it is written in a neutral point of view, and referenced to multiple independent sources.

Voceditenore (talk) 07:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

June 4

Looking for guidance and help for creating good wikipedia page

Hi Wiki,

Our wikipedia was tagged as copyrighted information and promotional. Do you have a guide or helpful resources in creating page for our organization?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks,

--Designthatrock (talk) 01:57, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Designthatrock, your deleted draft Draft:Limitless Ventures Inc. was a blatant copy of http://www.limitlessventures.org/about/.

The fact that you cannot even see how promotional and inappropriate the text was for an encyclopedia is a prime example of why Wikipedia strongly discourages editing with a conflict of interest. If you want some guides please read the following:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
• Wikipedia:Copyright violations
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
• Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Voceditenore (talk) 06:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Asia Pacific Vision

Dear sir or madam,

I am confused why the article was declined, perhaps there's something I can fix and resubmit again? Thanks.

Warm regards, Paul Hongkong2015 (talk) 02:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear sir or madam, I'm not sure why my article was declined. Is there anything I can do about it? The link to my article is

Draft:Asia Pacific Vision

Many thanks for your help in advance.

Regards,

Paul Mak

Hongkong2015 (talk) 06:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Paul. I don't blame you for being confused. This was a draft about a clearly real news agency but was declined with the following reason given:

The proposed article is not suitable for Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles on fictional subjects should cover their real-world context and contain sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance—not just a summary of the plot.

The reviewer (User:JustBerry) was using an automated script and most probably checked the wrong reason for the decline by mistake. My impression from the four references you've used is that this subject probably would meet the criteria for inclusion (See WP:ORG). I suggest that instead of simply listing them in a separate section, you add them as inline citations (see Help:Referencing for beginners) and perhaps find more sources, e.g. "Faux better or worse: fact and fiction are blurring as the taste for faux-news rises." in Television Asia (April 2004). Also be aware that Wikipedia articles about companies, especially if written by editors associated with those companies, come under special scrutiny (and rightly so). My advice would be to shorten the article, and make it it as matter-of-fact, neutral, and boring as possible, i.e. written in encyclopedic style. It's current style is not too bad as company articles go, but there's still room for improvement. Voceditenore (talk) 07:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll also ask User:DGG, who is especially experienced in reviewing articles like this, if he has some further input on this. Voceditenore (talk) 07:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

First, I must apologizer for the bad reviewing. Our use of this script is an anachronism--it is too susceptible to error, and anyone qualified to review should be capable of writing a proper delete reason, that explains the proper reason in detail. Myself, I almost always write a custom message and almost never use the script. The sooner we get rid of the entire current AfC structure, the better our reviewing will be. The problems with the article, as I see them is primarily the rather informal promotional tone,;It will help to remove all, or almost all adjectives. Then let me know on my talk page. DGG ( talk ) 09:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I concur with DGG's use of comments. This reviewer was indulging in a series of unlikely reviews. and had been discouraged. I hoped all had been caught. Hongkong2015 you deserve our apologies. Accidents happen, even in the best regulated houses. Fiddle Faddle 11:00, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:4INFO

• confused* First I made the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:4INFO with about 250 citations, then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drumlineramos does what I thought was an awesome job wikifying it, & now it's rejected because of not enough citations. I'm also confused how to leave Drumlineramos a message. TY!

MarkMillerITPro (talk) 14:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Help request

The article I drafted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The African Americans: Many Rivers to Crosswas declined because I improperly used in-line citations and subheadings. Before I try to resubmit, can I get some help on this?

Thanks! Kmburke76 (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)Kevin

Review of submission by [[User:Technical 13}}|Technical 13}}]] ([[Special:Contribs/Technical 13}}|contribs]]•[[User_talk:Technical 13}}|talk]])

What does everyone who monitors this page think of the new header for each section for those that use the ask link in the header? I did it for multiple reasons, first, it's a pain to find which section they commented in when there are multiple "Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here" sections. Second, since we are dealing with mostly new users here, it will be nice to have a nice big link to their contributions in the header (in case they actually sign and are using the default signature). Third, since we are scattered with submissions in User:, User_talk:, Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/, Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/, Draft:, and Draft_talk: now, it would be just too unmanagable to leave it as "Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/" or even change it to "Draft:". So, I eliminated that element all together. I'd be happy to add a preload template that will allow them to add a link directly to their draft in a {{La}} style template if that is wanted and people think it will be appropriately used. (I might even be able to create a custom substitutable template that will check if there is actually anything on the page they list (and try to find the most plausible namespace if it's not quite where they say it is), but that will take me a little of experimenting)... Let me know what you all think. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Probably a good idea (or something like it), Technical 13. But wouldn't it be better to post this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation for more input? Most of the people here are very busy just replying to queries about submissions. Voceditenore (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)