Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, FeedShowcaseParticipants
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

February 22

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/St. Cloud, Minnesota, Rockets Hockey Team

I have just submitted an article for review. Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/St. Cloud, Minnesota, Rockets Hockey Team I would like to add several more articles regarding the history of this team. How do I submit articles so that they will all be together under this one title? Thank you. Quintilian3 (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)Bev Hofmann

never mind we figured it out!Miss Wasky (talk) 05:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

What did you "figure out"? I don't understand what you mean by multiple articles under one title, that's actually not possible, every article must have a unique title.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/R.J Forrester

I have no interest of completing this article for creation, therefore how am I going to remove it off my back? Thanks you.  — SoapFan12 (talk, contribs) 10:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Just leave it alone and it will soon be deleted - unless someone else wants to work on it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Jean Venter/sandbox

Our submission on TrendBridge network groups, describes a concept. Please advise the need for corporate notability in this context. The research group TrendBridge is not notable, but it is part of a concepts name that it identified. not sure how to deal with this issue. please assist. Will it help If I link the particular word to a commercial website ? We are not trying to publicize the research group, just the concept Jean Venter (talk) 15:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Whatever it may be, Aggie80 makes a good point: There is no reference provided to an outside source of information. Besides notability, verifiability is also an important requirement of Wikipedia articles. This means there must be references to reliable sources of information. Please see the introduction to referencing or referencing for beginners for information on how to cite sources.

Finally, no, linking the word to a website doesn't help. See the external links guideline. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 00:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elsa Cladera Encinas de Bravo

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elsa Cladera Encinas de Bravo Hi, I'm waiting for an answer concerning my article to know whether it will be accepted. I wonder if I can change the name of the Article from "Elsa Cladera Encinas de Bravo" to "Elsa Cladera de Bravo" this is the name with which Elsa is most known. Does this represent some problem?

Nadezhda Bravo Cladera (talk) 16:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

No, this can be fixed rather easily. You can move the page to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elsa Cladera de Bravo. (Or, I could move it for you if you wanted.)Anon126 (talk - contribs) 00:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Monte Cook Games

Hello, I'm not certain if my article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Monte Cook Games is currently in the queue for a 2nd look after being declined the first time. I don't want to create a poor showing for myself by resubmitting it if it's already in the queue. The box at the top of the article submission page indicates the article has been declined, what I can do to improve the article (which I've done), and contains a resubmit button. But the box at the bottom indicates that the article has been submitted and that I should wait. Not sure which one to believe at this point. Thanks!

Nightscrawler (talk) 18:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The box that indicates the article has been submitted is what the reviewers are looking for, not the decline. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 19:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

February 23

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nextant Pacific

Hello there I am trying to write my first Wikipedia article on a new aerospace company, I cannot seem to get the references to work and also was hoping to upload a couple of pictures...Can you assist? Nowotny1945 (talk) 10:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

The references seem fine for now; you seem to understand how to add footnotes.

Because this draft is not yet an actual article, pictures can only be added if they are "free content" (see a list of free licenses). If the image is not released under a free license, it can only be uploaded after the article is accepted.

If you have free-content pictures, you can head to Wikimedia Commons to upload them. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:31, 23 February 2014‎ (UTC)

Your help needed

Hello I edited the Sadaka Reut section, following feedback I got from Wiki, but haven't heard anything from your editors.

When can I expect to get feedback?

Adi Sadaka Reut (talk) 11:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Your article has not been resubmitted. Click the "Resubmit" button in the notice at the top to do so. Keep in mind, though, that currently there is a severe backlog, so, even after you resubmit it, it may take a long time to get a response.

You can improve on it further in the meantime. Many of the external links can be transformed into additional references. You can also see the cheatsheet for some basic code. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Er.M.M.Idrees Ul haq Beigh

It have been more than 20 days & still the article is not added !!! How much time do review take when every word is explained ??? I wish you add it on priority !!! Thanks !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.69.143.149 (talk) 12:39, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have created my submission according to the reviewer's comments but my references do not connect with external websites. I checked Wikipedia referencing for biginners but I could not understand what exactly I should do to correct it. Please let me know what to do.

Best regards,

Sincerely, M. Ghazizadeh Ajecr (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)M.GhazizadehAjecr (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

If you cannot find sources that are independent of the journal, then it may just be too soon for Wikipedia to have an article on it, because it lacks notability in the Wikipedia sense.

If you have found some sources, add citations to them by following this quick guide below:

Formatting references using inline citations

Inline citation code; what you type in 'edit mode'	What it produces when you save
Two separate citations.<ref>Citation text.</ref><ref>Citation text2.</ref> Multiple<ref name="multiple">Citation text3.</ref> citation<ref name="multiple" /> use.<ref name="multiple" /> References {{reflist}}	Two separate citations. Multiple citation use. References
Templates that can be used between <ref>...</ref> tags to format your references {{Citation}} {{Cite web}} {{Cite book}} {{Cite news}} {{Cite journal}} Others Examples

Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Venus Cow

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sixthousandmiles

Hello,

I drafted this article some time ago, have made several edits but struggled to get it approved.

I got an email 2 days ago saying my article, that took me ages to learn how to produce, was scheduled for deletion. I went in and asked that we be given the opportunity to try and edit it again to get it through but it has been deleted anyway.

I have now gone through the process of requesting it is reinstated but not sure what happens now, how long it takes or what I should do next.

Thanks for your help. 16:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixthousandmiles (talk • contribs)

Hello Sixthousandmiles. Usually, undeletion requests are handled within a day. To prevent deletion in the future, you must be actively trying to improve the draft and respond to all concerns made by reviewers. The administrator who deleted your draft noted that it was excessively promotional. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a wide range of reliable sources that independent of the subject of the article. Remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and you should write your article as such. Mz7 (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jonah Berger

Hi, could someone take a look at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jonah Berger?

I've been trying to get it published for months now. Any help getting it through would be great. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.157.176.178 (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Because the subject of the article is a living person it must comply with more stringent rules and requirements than articles about other types of topics. References in articles about living people must be in the form of inline footnotes so that a reader can see what statement in the article is supported by what citation. The review I have just done has left a template (the top pink box) that contains links to pages with guidance on how to fix the problem. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've changed the URLs into wikilinks.

Your article was just declined because it does not meet the minimum standard for inline citatations. In particular, Wikipedia has a policy on information about living people, which states that any information "challenged or likely to be challenged" about a living person must be supported by an inline citation, not just a source listed at the end. (Consult the links for more information, or reply below if you have any more questions.) Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

February 24

Review of I cant find my article

I started to create a page on Martha Stone-Wiske but when I log back in I cant seem to find the page to continue working on the article.Junia Marcellus Marin (talk) 02:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

You can get a list of all the edits you've made by clicking "Contributions" in the upper-right corner when you're logged in, or by going to Special:Contributions/Junia Marcellus Marin. In this case your article is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Martha Stone-Wiske. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 04:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Henry van Zile Hyde

Hi,

My 'Henry van ZIle Hyde' article was rejected because of some unverifiable sources. I do realize that three of my twenty citations were personal letters. I will deal with that. However, I was wondering if the 'Oral History Interview with Henry van Zile Hyde' is considered a reliable source. The interview is located of the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum, so it is accessible to the public. However, the interview isn't secondary source material. Please let me know if this source is appropriate for wikipedia. Adamhmohr (talk) 14:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Adam

Adamhmohr (talk) 14:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

All of your references were invisible to the reviewer because you had put them inside an unclosed "comment" markup. I have fixed this. You may wish to resubmit the draft.

The use of primary sources is not prohibited. Nor is the unusual (for Wikipedia) referencing format that you have used. However, it may cause confusion for some reviewers; if there are any problems with this then please let us know.

Some of the more common approaches to referencing on Wikipedia are described at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ecksand

Hi, How do I know if my contribution has been reviewed, accepted or declined ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoan vidoni (talk • contribs) 20:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

A message will automatically be sent to your Talk page when a review has been done. While you wait for the review you could improve the article by writing what the various published articles you mention under the "Products" heading have actually said about the company and its products. Just mentioning that a magazine article about the subject exists is not as useful as actually summarizing what the magazine article actually said about it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Indianola Promise Community

I was wondering if anyone could tell me how to properly submit this article. Thank you

Trek 1802 (talk) 20:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Simply add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

February 25

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RESAAS

Hi,

the article I submitted was declined and I was wondering if you could advise me as to why and how to get it approved.

I've moved the link to the title. Anon126 (talk - contribs)

Thank you, Alyson Resaas55 (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The main reasons are given at the top of the page. In short, you have not shown notability, which generally means that other people have written about or otherwise discussed it. (See the general guideline, the specific guideline for organizations, and the specific guideline for Web content. Notability can be demonstrated by meeting any one of these.) If you can find outside reliable sources of information that discuss this website, please add them to the article. (See the introduction to referencing or referencing for beginners for more information on how to add sources.)

The article should also be changed to reflect a neutral point of view in order to be accepted. Such terms as "innovative" and "powerful" are known as "peacock terms" and discouraged if they are not credited to an independent source of information. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 03:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Multitasking in Multimedia Art

I hereby affirm that I, PhD Vesna Srnic am the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright of "Multitasking in Multimedia Art" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Multitasking_in_Multimedia_Art

I agree to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported".

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Digitalni035 (talk) 07:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)PhD Vesna Srnic, Croatia, Europe, Digitalni035 (talk) 07:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Media-Via owner and editor (http://media-via.net ) Digitalni035 (talk) 07:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)copyright-holder

Such a declaration is unnecessary. If you contribute content to Wikipedia and it has not been published elsewhere before, you already release it under CC-BY-SA and the GFDL (see the terms of use and the copyrights page). Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Er.M.M.Idrees Ul haq Beigh

I have removed all peacock terms used in this article, Now it is perfectly fit to be in Wikipedia , I hope Desk will clear it soon, as it was submitted on Feb 1st & is awaiting Clearance !!! The citation are fully verified by me , checked one by one !!! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beighidi (talk • contribs) 08:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm currently looking at the article. For future reference, please do not remove the box that says "Submission declined", as it provides important information for future reviewers. Thank you! APerson (talk!) 17:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

article creation

Dear Sir, Madam

My name is Avi Tawil. I'm the director of European Jewish Community Centre (EJCC), a non-profit organisation based in Brussels, Belgium, that promotes culture.

As the EJCC is an very active organisation, which hots lots of cultural events, I'd like to create an article on wikipedia with our history. I've been trying to create an article since a few months, but it's has been very difficult to do it, and there is always a different problem with it... which is quite frustrating. It's hard for me to understand what's the real issue, as other organisations do have a wikipedia article. So why can't I have a wikipedia article about my organisation ?

The last thing I read is that I should mention my relation with the organisation, which is not a problem, but then it wasn't written how I should proceed.

I'll deeply appreciate if you help me to create an article on the EJCC.

Thanks in advance for your time and attention!

I look forward to hearing back from you.

Best regards,

Avi Tawil EJCC Director — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avitawil (talk • contribs) 11:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Avi. Wikipedia does not have articles about all organisations, even ones that are very active with lots of cultural events. In addition, even if an article exists about another organisation, that does not mean that such an article is a model for what is needed to be accepted as a new article.

Even with your Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, you could write your article at articles for creation - Wikipedia:Articles for creation which would hopefully mean that the article draft does not need to be deleted each time it is rejected. Instead, you could work to improve it and overcome each problem. One thing to avoid doing is copying and pasting material from your organisation's own website (or anywhere else) into the article draft.

Before starting, read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners to see how to references your sources, and Wikipedia:VRS to see what sort of sources are needed to prove notability. The latter point is the most frequent problem. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually it seems you could continue improving your existing draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Jewish Community Centre and resubmit it when ready. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bavarian Autosport

I have written an article for review about Bavarian Autosport but I cannot figure out how to submit it?

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bavarian Autosport

Any help is much appreciated!

Sincerely, Laura BurgessLauraLMB (talk) 15:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page and then save the page. This will submit it for review, although you could have a long wait as there are thousands of submissions waiting at the moment. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Guitar Museum

Hello,

I'm just making sure that my article is in the queue, which I know is very long. I initially had two edits done, and then perormed the updates. Not having heard back from the editor, I'm presuming we're ready to go, or at least be put in the queue. Is this the case?

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Guitar Museum

AndreldritchAndreldritch (talk) 16:42, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes that page is still pending review. It's fine to edit the page while it's awaiting review (so long as you don't remove the submission template) and doing so will not delay the review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vu Digital

1) SUB-HEAD SIZE: My subheads look too small in preview. When the article is saved, will they be the same (larger) size in the final published version? Or do I do it, and if so, how?

2) UNDERLINED SUB-HEADS: How do a put the "bar" or underline beneath a sub-head? No underlines occur beneath sub-heads in my preview. Is this automatic or do I do it, and if the latter, how?

3) HYPERLINKED REFERENCES. I cite articles as references. How do I hyperlink the title of the article itself? Right now I've got the article title followed by the url of the story. James Weed (talk) 19:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

You can consult the cheatsheet for basic formatting code. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

February 26

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vu Digital

Clicked "save" and the article is up, with footnotes, but I don't see the sub-head "References" or the list of 10 footnotes -- is this automatically generated, or do I have to go back and edit the page -- and if so, how do I get in to edit? Thanks! Jim Weed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Weed (talk • contribs) 14:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I've fixed that for you in this edit. Note that the page is not submitted for review until you click the "click here" in the box near the top. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/George Hogarth Pringle

Hello I am just checking to make sure my article is in the queue for review. It was submitted January 20th and I haen't had to wait this long before. ThanksPapamac (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes this is still awaiting review. Unfortunately the backlog is even larger than usual. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:32, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chicago Department of Public Health

Hi, not sure why Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chicago Department of Public Health was declined because reliable sources could not be verified. It's similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Department_of_Health_and_Mental_Hygiene and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_department_of_public_health. In fact I used the same templates. I work at the Chicago Department of Public Health (fingerprinted and background checked and appointed). I used the city website as the page - having someone else cite the website doesn't improve validity. The website is the city's only authorized website. The logo I uploaded was made by us. I am authorized to use it. Not sure what else I can do to convince you that this is a real government department. It's also world renown in public health for it's programs, innovations and accreditation which I planned to add as I find the time. I also find it ironic and can use the exact same argument that APerson used, who doesn't have a real identity associated with their username, including a valid photo, name, background and verifiable work history offline. It has to work both ways for this to work at all. Thank you. Reedmonseur (talk) 17:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the article, it only has a total of two non-independent sources. However, it seems to me that notability is good, so there really is no reason not to create the article at this point. Article was created. APerson (talk!) 19:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Demi lion/sandbox

hi i am new to wikipedia just added a article. title: psipred or PSI-Pred. its still in sandbox. its being rejected 3rd time. i know it might be below wiki standards but i am still learning. its so much complex i mean every thing need an entire page to explain. just to put a sig using 4 tides it has an entire separate page. just a para would have being sufficient to explain sig.

its just that can u explain main parts like interacting with people and editing efficiently in short. why is my article rejected its not mentioned on my page. how to use talk page and user page Demi lion (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

If you haven't already, you can see writing better articles for an overview of what a good article is like in terms of content and layout. I also recommend the cheatsheet for information on basic formatting. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Devyani Khobragade

This is with reference to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Devyani Khobragade. The contribution has been declined due to "Reads like bullet point list instead of flowing prose." I would like to respectfully point out that the article is about a notable subject currently in the news, has two dozen citations from leading news sources, and is well laid out. I believe that once the article is approved for inclusion in the Wikipedia, its prose can be improved by contributors. I would like to respectfully request that the article be approved. Rome was not built in a day. R0x5r (talk) 19:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sayat demissie

Borne in the capital city of Ethiopia which is Addis Ababa 1990 December 26. Mothers name Woberst almu Fathers name Demissie worknhe . The youngest in her family Sayat has tow sisters, Her educational background is first degree in business administration and economics. sayat was miss world Ethiopia 2007. two times winner of best actress in a future film. She was ambassador of young Ethiopian womens for three consecutive years. In 2012 released her first album entitled kifel soste or part three and got recognition world wide. Sayat owen a hand made genuine leather hand bag and closing lines called Sayat . And she is known for not using any on line account like face book, tweeter or the likes . Sayat is one of the most famous and influential young women in Ethiopia of this generation. 21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Bezaethio (talk) 21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Note: This page is for asking questions about article drafts. If you have a question, please ask below. If you wish to resubmit your draft for review, you can click the "Resubmit" button in the notice at the top of it. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/diaosi

Hi,dear wiki,

I'm a student from UMASS. Editing an article on wiki is an important project of my graduate course "Popular Culture and Technology". I am supposed to hand in a report of the viewing history of my article due the beginning of April. If I failed to publish the article on wiki as soon as possible, I wouldn't be able to gather the data and comments which are prerequisite of my preparation for the final project.

I know all you guys are volunteers with heavy load of other important jobs. But could you please kindly considerate my request for getting my paper reviewed sooner? I'm a new comer from China. English is my second language, please forgive me if I do not make myself clear and please don't hesitate to contact me if there is any question.

Looking forward to your reply!

Yours,

Mindhunter333 Mindhunter333 (talk) 21:51, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I changed the spacing to make your message look better. I hope you don't mind. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sardar Kahn Singh Nakai

I think now that the article in question is  Unnecessary and wish to withdraw it. How to do the same?StratMan001 (talk) 23:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

February 27

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Montigo Resorts

Hi,

I would like to check what type of sources will be counted as notable sources? My references are all taken from the state media's publications and yet it cannot be accepted. Thanks.

(John AKM (talk) 07:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC))

Some ideas on the sort of sources that are best for proving notability can be found at Wikipedia:VRS. In more detail at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. One thing to note is that press releases or material based on press releases, as some of your existing sources seem to be, are not useable in proving the notability of a topic. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

virtualinfocom

Hi,

I have posted an article regarding my company and work.

We are company name virtualinfocom which deals in gaming animation and mobile apps and also we provide training to students on many subjects.

You may check our websites:

www.virtualinfocom.com www.virtualinfocom.org www.virtualinfocom.in www.virtualinfocom.net www.virtualinfocom.co.in wwww.jaipuranimation.com

But the article was declined .

Can you suggest me how to create the page for the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.251.213.164 (talk) 12:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Your first step should be to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ShopVisible

I am having trouble understanding why my article has been rejected for notability. Seven out of eleven sources are secondary sources from trusted industry outlets, so there is a variety of reliable sources of information. The rejection feedback also mentions that there should be clear evidence as to why this article is worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia, and in addition to the various secondary sources referenced, the company's direct and indirect competitors have Wikipedia pages as well - so firms in this industry have already been deemed worthy for inclusion. Jenniferarpr (talk) 16:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)jenniferarpr

The industry may be notable, but companies must be notable in and of themselves to be included in Wikipedia. (See WP:ORGIN for more information.) Anon126 (talk - contribs) 20:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Creating A New Article

Hi All,

I simply cannot figure out how to create a new article. I currently have one pending for review, but have others I'd like to create.

Any direction would be appreciated.

Thanks, Jackie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehmeejay (talk • contribs) 20:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

You can create a new article by going to User:Ehmeejay/Your new article name and selecting the option to create the page. You can add {{subst:submit}} to the top when you're ready to submit it for review. If you're not ready, you can add {{subst:AFC draft}} to the top, which will give you a button to submit it later. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 20:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Wye wasn't my article puplished? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.214.15.132 (talk) 23:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

That submission was declined for the reasons given in the pink box at the top of that page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

February 28

Review of E System Design new page

i need some help.

I tried to minimize issues and copied Nimbic's company web page (EDA companies). Once copied, I then changed all of Nimbic's specific information to ours and thought it would be accepted. Unfortunately it was not. So my "low risk" plan failed!

Any suggestions?

Thanks, 99.9.19.0 (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)Bill

It would be useful to have a link to the page that you're asking about.

In general it is not a good idea to base a new article on the format and layout of a related existing article. Instead, have a look at existing recognised Wikipedia Good Articles to see what sort of coverage could be aimed at. Links to Good Articles about businesses and organisations can be found at Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society#Economics and business. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:33, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

You should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/R.D. Landing

I would like to know why my article was not accepted.

Title of submission: David Correa

[[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/R.D. Landing

Thank you!

R.D.R.D. Landing (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Correa was declined for the reasons given in and under the pink box on that page. Click on the links provided in the pink box for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles R. Conn

Hello! I am really struggling with my first Wikipedia entry: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles R. Conn - I keep being told "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia." - I keep adding new citations and I can't think of anything else to do! Is there a way of asking an experienced wikipedia editor to assist on a project as I think it is my inexperience which is letting this page down and I feel quite dispondent about it. Babettet (talk) 09:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

What is he notable as? An academic? A fundraiser? Being a professorial fellow at Balliol College might maybe be somewhere near meeting Wikipedia:ACADEMIC.

The "List of Wardens" is out of place in the article about Conn, even though it is useful (for this discussion only) in showing that people in this position tend to be notable academics.

It is rather difficult to work out which of the references you've added are actually contributing to proving his notability. So for example the Nick Anderson piece in the Washington Post is permissible as a source to support the fact that a particular important event happened during Conn's tenure, but it doesn't actually mention Conn himself at all. Neither does the other Washington Post piece. Adding more sources related to the organisation Conn works for doesn't help prove notability, in fact it makes it harder because the reviewer can't see the wood for the trees. There's nothing to indicate that Idahonaturenotes.blogspot.co.uk is a reliable source. Citing material written by Conn in the references, for example the Conservation Biology piece, causes confusion because what the reviewer is looking for is material written about Conn. The same goes for listing the homepage of the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation as a reference - it doesn't mention Conn at all. And so on. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tenagino Probus

I would like to attach maps of the provinces of Numidia and (Roman Egypt). Where can i access these?Pjbjas (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

At https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Maps_of_Numidia and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Roman_Egypt Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ShopVisible

I am having trouble understanding why my article has been rejected for notability. Seven out of eleven sources are secondary sources from trusted industry outlets, so there is a variety of reliable sources of information. The rejection feedback also mentions that there should be clear evidence as to why this article is worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia, and in addition to the various secondary sources referenced, the company's direct and indirect competitors have Wikipedia pages as well - so firms in this industry have already been deemed worthy for inclusion. Jenniferarpr (talk) 16:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)jenniferarpr

The industry may be notable, but companies must be notable in and of themselves to be included in Wikipedia. (See WP:ORGIN for more information.) Anon126 (talk - contribs) 20:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I am responding to the answer that was given to me yesterday (above): If the competitors are notable, then why isn't the company they directly compete with? I've added in additional secondary sources referencing the company after each rejection. If I add even more secondary resources and include them in the submission, will this article then be acceptable? How many are required?72.16.218.22 (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)jenniferarpr