Wikipedia:Requests for feedback

"WP:FEED" redirects here. For the essay on vandalism, see Wikipedia:Deny recognition. For RSS and Atom feeds, see Wikipedia:Syndication. For the page rating system, see Wikipedia:Article Feedback Tool.

Requests for Feedback

This page provides comments and constructive criticism about articles that you have drafted, created, or substantially changed. This is not a general help page. To seek assistance or ask a question, see Wikipedia:Questions. If you are seeking an outside opinion about a dispute, please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Please note that this page is patrolled by volunteer editors just like you and it may take several days to review your request.

Before you request feedback

There are certain things which come up again and again so it may help if you deal with them before requesting feedback: Does your article have reliable sources? These are important in terms of both verifiability and notability. Do you have a conflict of interest that may harm your ability to produce a neutral article? If you would like a beginner's guide to these sorts of issues, take a look at the article wizard. If you are unsure about how to edit Wikipedia articles, take a look at this tutorial. For a more general discussion of writing your first article, see "Your first article".

How to post a request

Place a Wikilink, with the title of the page inside [[ and ]] - for example, [[User:Example/Lipsum]] or [[Cats]] - in the box below. Click Click To Add Request In the new article, Write a brief summary of your work or what in particular you need help with, but do not post the whole article here. If you have rewritten an existing article, you may wish to provide a diff link from that article's history that shows your changes. Check regularly for responses to your request; they will most often be made here. ↓ Post your request using the box below. Replace "Untitled" with a wikilink to your article - e.g. [[User:Example/Lipsum]] or [[Cats]] ↓

After Receiving Feedback

Check back here often, as you will receive a response here. Respond to the feedback, either with a simple thank you, to ask for help with anything mentioned, or, after you've made some of the improvements, what they think of them. Consider helping out here in the future - anyone can read up on what articles should be like and provide constructive criticism.

Are you providing feedback?

Please consider notifying the user whose article you are providing feedback for by placing a message on their talk page, so they will be able to read it in a timely manner and reply if necessary. You can use.. {{Feedbackreply-sm}} A template asking the user to check back here and consider responding {{Feedbackreply-alt}} A more personal version of the first offering your help with developing, moving to mainspace, etc.

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

The previous few days of requests are transcluded below. The pages for the past 20 days are: ()

• August 1
• August 2
• August 3
• August 4
• August 5
• August 6
• August 7
• August 8
• August 9
• August 10
• August 11
• August 12
• August 13
• August 14
• August 15
• August 16
• August 17
• August 18
• August 19
• August 20

Index of all requests for feedback

http://en.wikipedia.org:80/wiki/User:Perelien/Sandbox

Hi! I'm a new user, and a first-time contributor. I've just written an article on Dutch trance artist DJ Dazzle (it's in my Sandbox), and I would really appreciate it if someone could have a look at it and give me some feedback. Thanks a lot in advance! Perelien (talk) 17:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest adding more reliable sources for verifiability, and remember to be careful with words like keen or instantly hooked, because they can sometimes be exaggerations. The citation style is a little bit unclear (enclosing the references in hyperlinks isn't necessary), but this should be ready for a mainspace move sometime soon. Spring12 (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Spring12, thank you very much for your feedback and tips! I've edited the expressions you pointed out. I've also tried a different approach with regards to references, would you please have another look? Adding more references is quite difficult, though, as there aren't too many available. The only more recent bio I could find online is at the artist's MySpace page - can I list that one? I will keep working on it, though! I also have a question concerning images: I've received a few pictures in a promo pack, from the artist's manager. May I use them here? Thanks in advance! Perelien (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The style needs work; For example, this sentence;

• In general he is associated with trance, but his style is quite varied - he plays both (vocal) trance, progressive, tech house and dance music.

This is opinionated; try to be neutral; word it so that the reader can make up there own mind. Example;

• He has performed trance, vocal trance, progressive, tech house and dance music.<ref>some reference</ref>.

Notice the links; I've used things like;

[[Progressive electronic dance music|progressive]]

See WP:linking for more info on this.

If there are no references, then simply leave it out.

Avoid myspace totally. It's the definition of an unreliable source. (See WP:RS and WP:V)

The most important thing is the references; for tips on referencing, please look at User:Chzz/refs.

Hope this helps,  Chzz  ►  02:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Article: Situationist International - from Start to C-Class

I would say Situationist International has now evolved to C-Class. Any comments?--Sum (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh my. The references are a real mess at the moment, and in dire need of a thorough going-over. You might get some ideas from user:chzz/refs. Reliable, verifiable references are vital to an article - a good way to think of it is, if you were reading the article, and looked at all the books, weblinks etc, would you be able to check up every single fact? --  Chzz  ►  05:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, but using templates for citations is not a requirement for C-Class.--Sum (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies, I never intended to imply that cite tags were necessary, merely that I felt that the biggest issue with the article was the referencing, and that use of cite tags is, in my experience, a good way of improving the referencing. I find it difficult to assert many of the facts in the article, and that is a central pillar of Wikipedia: verifiability.

I feel that the best way to progress this article would be to sort out the references. If your require more specific feedback, or if we can help in specifics, please let us know.  Chzz  ►  02:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Modbear/Sandbox - Counterstring

Hello. I recently requested an article on counterstrings (graduated strings used in software testing), but then decided to take the initiative and created this article in my user space. I'm interestred in feedback on the topic notablity, the clarity of explanation, the style and the language issues (as I'm not a native speaker). Thanks! --Modbear (talk) 21:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not good with computer science, but I showed another editor your article and they found it interesting. However, both of us agreed that the sources you used are self-published sources (blogs) which aren't really credible/acceptable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia requires multiple third-party, reliable sources to show that something is notable enough for inclusion. I tried to do some investigating to see if there were more credible sources that would prove notability, but came up short. Killiondude (talk) 00:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the term is pretty specific, so it's no wonder that there aren't any solid white papers written about it. :-) In fact, the reason I wrote this article is that I once came across this term and couldn't find its definition almost anywhere, including Wikipedia (which has an extensive computer science knowledge base).

As for WP:SPS, I've noticed that it makes an exception for self-published sources "produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Out of the three sources I provided, the earliest and initial one, [1], is James Bach's blog. He is indeed an expert in software testing (whish is the field the term relates to), the author of many published works on testing (see [2], [3]) and co-author of Cem Kaner (you can find both them under Software_testing#References). Given this, can this source be accepted? --Modbear (talk) 17:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had wondered if any of the blog authors would be considered "experts in their fields". Even if James Bach would be considered an "expert" and therefore citing his blog is allowed (which, I'm leaning towards agreeing with), it still doesn't fulfill WP:N. There needs to be "significant coverage" to warrant an article, and one blog about it doesn't really fulfill that... I don't make the rules, I just follow them :-) Actually, it was community consensus that formed that rule many years ago. Killiondude (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see. --Modbear (talk) 13:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for feedback on article Crazy Bones

Hello All,

I've been around on wikipedia for a while, but I've only really reverted vandalism up until now. I was looking around for information on a toy a friends child was playing with and when I got the the page Crazy Bones I was a bit disappointed. I decided I would have a crack at revising it a little bit and did just that. The thing is I don't know if I've done a good job or where to go with it next!? I'd really like to get it up to DYK status because I think a hook about Greek kids playing with sheeps knucklebones would be BRILLIANT! Your time, effort and advice is greatly appreciated! --LookingYourBest (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies that it took awhile to reply. I read your post and the article the day you left the above message, to see if it could be a DYK candidate, but the time had already passed. You had 5 days from the time you increased its content fivefold (5x) to submit it for DYK, and that time had already passed (on the 12th). Nice job with the article! Its an interesting topic. Right now I think the second half needs the most work. According to WP:Layout#Paragraphs and WP:Guide to writing better articles#Paragraphs, very short sections and paragraphs should be avoided if possible. So perhaps those snippets of information can be added to, or somehow combined by removing the individual sections for each of them, and then expanding on the one-two sentence paragraphs. Also you might take a look at the {{cite}} templates to clean up the citations. Also, be careful about giving too many examples of model/series names. It invites users to add to the list, whereas prose is generally preferred over lists of things (in actual articles). Keep plugging away. Hope this helps :-) Killiondude (talk) 08:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

That's an amazing amount of help, thanks a million for that! (Still gutted I didn't make the DYK timeline! Oh well!) I'll have a good, hard look at that second half and try and work out what I can do with it. Do you mind if I ask you to review it again when I do? Many thanks again! --LookingYourBest (talk) 03:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, of coarse. You can ask here or on my talk page. You're very welcome! Killiondude (talk) 04:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Swimlej/Fighting_Chance

I am working in this article about Fighting Chance a non-profit cancer information center in my hometown. It is my first article, and I wanted to make sure I included enough references to third party sources. Any suggests that you can give to help improve the article would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimlej (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC) --Swimlej (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

SLIMbus

This is the first article I have written for Wikipedia. I would appreciate any feedback. Thanks, --Kdboyce (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The first issue I have with this article is the first part; the lede section. The very first words should be the title of the article enclosed in '''. It should then summarize the rest of the article - it should immediately tell us what it's all about. Remember that it will be read from people all over the world, so perhaps it should start;

Fighting Chance is an American charity that provides counseling for cancer patients and caregivers.

The second problem with this is references; add references for everything - make sure they are reliable and verifiable sources. The webpage of the charity is a primary source, so may be challenged. For example, if you say "The organisation has 3000 employees" with a reference to their own website, that information may later be removed. If you can source a national newspaper article that mentions the fact, it should be OK. For help with how to make good refs, see my own tips in User:Chzz/refs.

I also recommend that you get in touch with other people in the community. Go to their talk page, create a new section, and say hello. Remember to 'sign' your message, with ~~~~ at the end. Some of the others I've helped with similar articles include;

• BasicallyGood (talk · contribs) who made Braille Institute of America
• Fintanmon (talk · contribs) who made Free Legal Advice Centres
• Peto Australis (talk · contribs) who made Centres Against Sexual Assault
• Evsfort (talk · contribs), who has also just joined, and wishes to create an article about a charitable org.

It's also worthwhile you reading through their talk pages, to see the issues they faced with their articles.

Best of luck; please leave me a message some time, and let me know how you're getting along.  Chzz  ►  02:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Politics of Bristol

Hi,

I've spent today editing the Politics of Bristol article today and I think it looks a lot better for it.

I've hidden some of the information on the History of Bristol City Council page because I think the original was getting a bit crowded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SamUK (talk • contribs) 22:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Gosh, I see you've done a lot of work on it, and tables are very fiddly - great job!

Suggestions for further development;

• The lede section could be a bit longer, giving more of a summary. Also avoid vague terms. This sentence; "The overall trend of both local and national representation is left of centre, favouring the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats." - it would be better to state the trend in terms of a percentage, and avoid 'favouring' (weasel words). State the facts, and let the reader decide how significant they are.
• The references could be improved considerably by using citation tags. For some help on this, see user:chzz/help/refs.

I hope this helps; keep up the good work!  Chzz  ►  19:03, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

proposal for merging 2 articles

In my opinion Two-body_problem and Gravitational_two-body_problem should be merged. What is the correct procedure, I mean "what is the correct way for doing this?"

I added banner

and

in respective articles, is it enough?

Daniel exb (talk) 22:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

You could start off a discussion as explained at Help:Merging and moving pages. bamse (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I see that Gravitational two-body problem has two proposals to merge it into other articles, so ironically it would appear to be in danger of ripping apart! I see no discussion so far, so I would suggest first, leave a message on the talk page of the major contributors - ie check in the history, see who has really worked on the articles, and ask for their input in the discussion. You could also leave a message in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics, seeking input on the article talk page.

If you don't get much of a response, then be bold, and perform the merger. Anything can be 'undone', and sometimes the only feedback comes after the event. See WP:BRD.

Best of luck with whatever actions you take,  Chzz  ►  18:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Toxic encephalopathy

Toxic encephalopathy is a broad neurologic disorder caused by toxic substances, such as paint solvents. Please give suggestions for improvement to this article so that it reaches B-class or GA status. Is anything missing.(By the way, I know the lead needs expansion).--Edward130603 (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The WP:LEDE needs expansion :-)

The first thing that I noticed was, the very wide picture - it was wider than my screen and therefore it wrapped over the Wikipedia search bar etc. I have changed this to use Template:Wide image. That's one solution; however, I wonder if the image itself is appropriate. Images can be invaluable in article, but if it can be said in prose, this is preferred.

There are a lot of sections, and they are all quite short; see if it would be possible to merge some of them together. A section should typically have two to five paragraphs, and most in this article just have a few lines. I'm sure that this article could be expanded, and this would be required to provide the breath of coverage required for a good article.

There are several 'lists' in the article, and these would look better in prose form. Instead of;

Toxic encephalopathy is caused by extended exposure to toxic chemicals. These include:

• 1,1,1-trichloroethane
• Trichloroethylene
• Perchloroethylene

...it would be better to put;

Toxic encephalopathy is caused by extended exposure to toxic chemicals, including 1,1,1-trichloroethane, Trichloroethylene and Perchloroethylene.

This will also help make the article look less 'thin'.

The best overall advice I can offer, is to find articles on similar topics that are already good articles or even featured articles - see how they have done things. For example, in this case, Alzheimer's disease, Multiple sclerosis and Meningitis are all featured articles.

Anyway - I see that the article is also being peer reviewed, so hopefully you will have enough ideas for now!

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  18:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions Chzz. --Edward130603 (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Balfred1980

Hi, I have just written a first draft of my first article for Wikipedia on my (wiki) homepage and I was hoping for some feedback before I post it to the actual site. Any/all feedback both positive and negative are expected and encouraged. Thanks in advance --Balfred1980 (talk) 04:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, where would be the best place to put this article? I see on some of the help pages that local band articles (although the band is not mine) don't seem to belong on the main site. I do plan on writing quite a few more of these for other local bands in my area but where is the best place to put them? Balfred1980 (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tex2009/Tonya_Evinger

I've decided to jump on the wikipedia train and actually make a page. This is my first time, so please don't ream me too badly.

Thanks, Tex2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tex2009 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Education in Guyana

Hello,

Please review article at caption, and recommend areas for improvement - also it's been developed from a one paragraph stub to about eight or more, please give it a new rating on the quality scale.

Thanks,

Speakwise