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: ()

• May 3
• May 4
• May 5
• May 6
• May 7
• May 8
• May 9
• May 10
• May 11
• May 12
• May 13
• May 14
• May 15
• May 16
• May 17
• May 18
• May 19
• May 20
• May 21
• May 22

Index of all requests for feedback

Pentecostalism

I and a few other editors have substantially improved the article from the doctrinal point of view. However, the history sections are lacking and we haven't done much work there. I would like a review to give us a different perspective on what we should add, expand, remove, and/or rearrange. Thanks. Ltwin (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that whenever you want a review for an article, you take it to peer review. There it will be listed along with other articles that people routinely stop by and review. Cheers. Mm40 (talk) 11:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Adyar

I made some substantial edits to the page Adyar against the three problem areas - references, wikification, peacocking. I think I've kinda taken care of these. Can I get some feedback before I remove the tags? -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 02:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

You have taken care of all three things. Good work! And you did the right thing to remove the wikification and peacock tags. I am a little hesitant as to the removal of the unreferenced tag. Perhaps it would have been better to change it to a refimprove tag. Debresser (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

New Entry for Semantic Designs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Clinternet/Semantic_Designs

I am trying to set up an entry for this company. I have started the page, but would appreciate suggestions on improving it so it is suitable for posting

-Clinternet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clinternet (talk • contribs) 15:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Dawn Bard already gave a good summary of what the problem is with the article on your talk page. The article lacks proof of notability. The only reference returns a "page not found". To improve the article, fix the reference link and add more references of independent and reliable sources that show the relevance of this company. There are some minor issues as well: don't hyperlink in the the text section of the article. The history section should be expanded. bamse (talk) 01:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

NA'AMAT USA

I am requesting that NA'AMAT USA be included in the list of Women's Organizations and Jewish Women's Organizations.

NA'AMAT USA is part of the internation movement which supports the work of NA'AMAT Israel, Israel's largest women's movement. It provides social services for women, youth, children and families in Israel including Jewish, Arab, and Druse citizens of Israel.

Services include Israel's largest network of day care centers, technological high schools for at-risk youth, women's centers, legal services and much more. The web site of NA'AMAT USA is www.naamat.org

Sylvia Lewis, National Vice President NA'AMAT USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Syllewis1 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I have added it to List of women's organizations#United_States with this edit.

I cannot find an article called "Jewish Women's Organizations" or "List of Jewish Women's Organizations".

Please note that NA'AMAT appears as a red link because there is no article yet. If you wish to get an article made, you could either add it to the Wikipedia:Requested articles, or you could create an article in your user area - for example, User:Syllewis1/NA'AMAT - with suitable references to reliable sources, and then add it to the Wikipedia:Articles for creation. If you decide to do this, please read WP:BESTCOI, which explains about writing articles when you have a conflict of interest. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  03:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Cold distillation new page

Hi,

I'd like to add a page describing Cold distillation. I have drafted Cold distillation [1] as a user page. can i have some feedback on it before submitting to publish please?

Many thanks

Tom Jefferies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjefferies (talk • contribs) 15:53, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Please add references and wikilink the article. What is OXLEY gin? At the moment it is hard to say if "Cold distillation" is a commonly used term or just marketing. It is also not clear what the difference to vacuum distillation is. Maybe you could expand the article to explain the different stills. Don't wikilink section headings. The first sentence is a bit confusing: "...reduce the pressure to temperatures of between....". bamse (talk) 00:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Nocturnes Op. 37 (Chopin)

This is an article about a pair of Chopin's nocturnes for piano. The article includes excerpts, summarys, the significance of these nocturnes, as well as quite a few other things.

After I started the article, many people significantly expanded it. I believe it is quite comprehensive now.

I am wondering if the B rating is appropriate. Also, how can this article be prepared for GA Assessment. Any improvements.

--Edward130603 (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

One way to see what the article needs for GA is to look at articles of the same kind that are already Good Articles. A categorized list of Good Articles is at Wikipedia:Good Articles. Best of luck. Diderot's dreams (talk) 01:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do that. Does anyone have any specific comments?--Edward130603 (talk) 19:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

• The first paragraph of the lede contains the word 'nocturne(s)' eight times; I know that this is difficult to avoid, but with rephrasing that could be reduced somewhat.

• The lede contains information that is not given elsewhere in the document - e.g. about George Sand. The lede should be a summary of the whole article - this is a GA requirement.

• "considered to be one of the better nocturnes" - by whom?

• "are definite signs of "progress"" - quotations must always be followed by an immediate reference (GA requirement) - not at the end of the sentence

• I don't know much about the specific topic, but I feel that the article could be more 'broad in scope' - another GA requirement. For example, information about significant performances, uses in contemporary music (derivatives?), or other appropriate details. From a very brief search in Google Books, for example, I found info here about copies of a 'proof stage' of the work.

Those are some sample specific comments; in working towards GA, I recommend the following course of action;

• Have a look through this GA 'cheat sheet' for the kind of issues you will need to address;
• Look at other, similar, featured articles and copy the style. For example, Symphony No. 3 (Górecki).
• Request a peer review.

I wish you the very best of luck.  Chzz  ►  03:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Chzz. Your feedback is always so helpful.--Edward130603 (talk) 11:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Warren Cormier

Warren Cormier is the CEO of the National Association of Retirement Plan Participants. He is also the President of Boston Research Group (BRG), and Co-Founder of the RAND Behavioral Finance Forum.

Warren Cormier's research and professional experience is in qualitative and quantitative experience in financial services research for investment companies, banks and the insurance sector.

His work includes projects that focus on strategic marketing issues, market segmentation, product development, customer satisfaction, consumer learning, decision-making processes, distribution issues, competitive assessments and marketing communications.

Mr. Cormier's work covers a broad segment of the Defined Contribution Industry including the issues of plan providers, intermediaries, plan administrators and participants. Mr. Cormier is the creator of the DCP 2000-2009 plan sponsor satisfaction and market dynamics study. 401(k) record keepers representing 95% of all 401(k) assets and plans subscribe to BRG’s DCP study. DCP scores are requisite data for most DC industry plan provider search RFPs.

This is my first attempt at an article, any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

(This section was added, along with the section below, by 69.227.225.41 (talk · contribs) 17:00, 28 May 2009  Chzz  ►  03:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC))

See below section for replies.  Chzz  ►  03:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

National Association of Retirement Plan Participants - NARPP

The National Association of Retirement Plan Participants (NARPP), founded in 2009 is an advocacy Group that, according to its mission statement, has a goal to "help 401(k) plan participants make informed decisions about their retirement, to provide them with a platform for discussion, and to advocate on their behalf with employers, 401(k) plan providers and Washington policymakers."

NARPP functions as an independent association supported solely by members and does not sell any financial products or represent any financial institutions. NARPP has an advisory board containing a mix of industry, research and academics from behavioral economics

69.227.225.41 (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC) jackmartinb 69.227.225.41 (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello there. The very first thing that you should do is, get yourself a Wikipedia login. It is free, easy, and will allow us to help you a lot further. See Wikipedia:Why create an account?.

Once you have an account, you can create articles like that in your own user space, and work on them.

Judging from the things you have written, I think that you might need to also read through the business FAQ. For inclusion, the articles will need to be notable (as detailed in WP:ORG), and the sources will have to be verifiable and reliable.

I hope that you will be able to contribute to Wikipedia.  Chzz  ►  03:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Introduction to quantum mechanics

I am earnestly seeking non-experts to assess a subject about which they probably know very little. There are two WP articles concerning quantum mechanics. One, Quantum mechanics, is designed to be a full exposition of the subject for those who wish to explore the topic at depth. The other, Introduction to quantum mechanics is, in the words of the WP:Hatnote, designed to "an accessible, non-technical introduction to the subject. For the main encyclopedia article, see Quantum mechanics." The present user, your obedient servant, rewrote the article in what to him was the spirit of its title and introduced it on 27 May 2009. It was reverted with the suggestion WP:BRD. You can see the difference between the older, longer, article and the new one here (you have to scroll all the way to the bottom). The comments of the entire Wikipedia community, not just physicists, are welcome, and indeed, sought. Yours sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, this is a noble idea. Difficult, but worthwhile.

The 'see also' is very long. This looks to me like a prime candidate for a navbox - a navigation box. I quickly knocked one up, please see user:chzz/quantum. If you edit it, you'll see that the code is not too complicated. I've made no good attempt at deciding the sections etc, I leave that to the experts, but I feel that if a good, organised navbox could be made about the 'Quantum' topic, this could usefully be used at the bottom of all of those articles. Please feel free to edit it, copy it, play with it, and make a template:navbox quantum.

I think this would be much better than the infobox used at present. For one thing, I'd like to see a more exciting photo at the top; was it Stephen Hawking who was told, every equation he put in his book would halve the readership? If this is an intro for us non-experts, then a nice, impressive picture would be a lot better than an equation which is going to be meaningless to us.

I think that the lede section should be much longer; an overview of the whole article.

I think that a lot of the language used needs work; it often borders on original research, and some of it sounds non-encyclopaedic and perhaps patronising; for example;

The idea of particles and waves is simply a mental model derived from everyday experience. Take, for example, the rainbow of colours reflected from a puddle of water when a thin film of oil rests on its surface. That phenomenon makes sense by thinking of light as waves...

A quick suggested rewrite;

Energy can be thought of as particles or waves; neither is the truth, but both models help us to think of quantum events in every-day terms. The rainbow of colours reflected from a puddle of oily water can be understood by thinking of light as waves...

...the above is by no means perfect - a rough draft. The idea is to present the facts, and let the reader draw their own conclusion. Avoid saying "this is simple" and "makes sense by..." (maybe to you, maybe not to the reader), and "Take, for example" (not very encyclopaedic language).

I think that the article should focus more on an explanation of Quantum mechanics, and less on the history. If the history can still be covered whilst explaining the theory, then all the better.

All of the above - as everything I write - is IMHO. Explaining Quantum mechanics to non-experts is not easy, but exactly the sort of thing that Wikipedia can strive to do. I wish you the very best of luck with it.  Chzz  ►  05:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Economic history of China

I've worked on this article for three months, bringing it from a stub(which I deleted) and brought it to the current status. I'd like some feedback on ways the article can be improved.(Note: This inquiry is limited to pre-1911). Teeninvestor (talk) 02:05, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't have time to read the article at the moment but it looks well-sourced and comprehensive. If you think that it is ready for that, you might want to put it up at Wikipedia:Peer review. On first glance the choice of pictures could suggest that the article is about art in China rather than economy. Maybe you could add economy related graphs or maps of trade routes, etc to the article. I am not familiar with the subject though. If these suggestions don't make sense, just ignore them.bamse (talk) 02:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Frank D'Angelo

I've written Frank D'Angelo, and am interested in getting some feedback on what research I can do to make it better. Anything helps... this is my first page and I want to get into some good habits.

Alexthepuffin (talk) 16:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi! You might wanna take skim through WP:BETTER which is a page about how you can make articles better. Nice job getting so many references for the article so far. One thing to do is to stay on topic. Its easy to start getting into particulars of his different business choices, but we have to remember this is a general biography, and some detailed specifics can probably go into the relative company articles. Also, you might wanna work on fixing the shorter sections. You might try to combine some information and short paragraphs to consolidate sections. For instance, the "Restaurant" and "Other Controversies" sections have 1 sentence each. Try to consolidate the sections or form subsections, perhaps. Adding an infobox might also help the article. There's the general {{Infobox person}} or you could look around and find one that might fit this specific person better. Also, trying to find a picture of him wouldn't hurt either. Killiondude (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

These are great suggestions, thank you. I have removed things that are duplicates of what is in Steelback Brewery to keep the topic on him, not his companies. I also merged some sections and used subsections for his businesses and controversies. Some of those subsections have just once sentence. Do you think that makes sense? I've hunted for a photo of him, but I just can't find one that has the right license. But there are lots of press photos of him. Alexthepuffin (talk) 21:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

How to organize knowledge.

I read a Talk posted 23 March 2009 at 19:45 in WikiProject Chemistry which gave me an idea of how to provides a guide for organizing knowledge: Tetrahedral molecular geometry article the Periodic Table is sliced up tetrahedron provides an example of how I would envision proceeding. For one example, the human condition could begin with four major areas that are called blocks(one suggestion for example: reality, desires, perceptions, and ideas). As used in chemistry, as was recently discovered,those blocks, if ordered and proportioned in accordance with specific criteria, are simply the slices of regular tetrahedron. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elderorphan (talk • contribs) 20:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're saying, really. But I know this probably isn't the correct venue. This page is to request feedback for articles. ;-) Killiondude (talk) 20:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Central Morocco Tamazight

I've expanded Central Morocco Tamazight from a one-sentence article. However I recognize that it would be better to have the information coming from more sources. Does this article still deserve its start-class rating? Also, what would be good to add? Mo-Al (talk) 23:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Ktiv male

The article ktiv male has been developed significantly since it was last rated. At what level of quality is it now? Mo-Al (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I was going to suggest that you ask at WP:HEBREW for a fuller review, but I see that WP:JUDAISM has superseded them. I don't think the article can be assessed higher than start quality right now because there's only 1 reference that is cited. Also note that we don't place external links in the body of an article, nor links to other Wikimedia wikis (in the body). I think if there were around 5 more references, this could be C-Class. But like I said, you should ask WP:JUDAISM on their talk page. They'd be able to give more pointers on how to make this specific article better. Killiondude (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Article Deleted! Why?

I wrote a short article on the Kilnhurst MFC (Model Flying Club) giving a little bit of information about the club and that it is located at a wood called Kilnhurst coppice in staffordshire UK. Kilnhurst meaning "Kiln in the wood" and its relation to a local brick works. the article has been deleted I assume as it was about a club or company YET you allow The Microsoft Corporation. Please explain as my article would have been of interest to local people! Mjdennison (talk) 11:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Did you read the explanation at User talk:Mjdennison#Speedy deletion nomination of Kilnhurst mfc ? bamse (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. Killiondude (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep I read it and whilst Kilnhurst MFC is a club the article did have local interesting information. It also it states that it may have been deleted "because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia" Well as I stated above The Microsoft Corporation is a company and that is included and just because some people don't think information about the history of a local wood and brickworks is interesting it is wrong to assume that others won't either! so why not remove The Microsoft Corporation as I bet there are people who think that it is also uninteresting!!!

Mjdennison (talk) 08:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company

I have extensively rewritten, referenced, and cited this article. I would like a more experienced editor to look at it, provide feedback, and if approprate let me know the proceedures to upgrade the article from start class

Ecragg (talk) 12:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)