Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 636: Line 636:


Steven Paul Fisher [[User:Steven Paul Fisher|Steven Paul Fisher]] ([[User talk:Steven Paul Fisher|talk]]) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Steven Paul Fisher [[User:Steven Paul Fisher|Steven Paul Fisher]] ([[User talk:Steven Paul Fisher|talk]]) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

== 15:43:31, 27 February 2015 review of submission by {{ Anthony Bradbury}} ==
{{Lafc|username=SirJamesHunt|ts=15:43:31, 27 February 2015|page=
[[Draft:Soft Robotics]]
}}

The submitted articles [[Draft:Soft Robotics]] has been rejected by and marked for speedy deletion. Unfortunately, numerous attempts to contact the reviewer {{ Anthony Bradbury}} to clarify the issues were futile. He might be too busy. I am afraid, that the whole article might be deleted and the work of numerous people will be lost.
The issue seems to be a copyright infringement, but we don't have access to the draft and therefore we can not delete the picture or get the missing copyright information. Also the link to rebuttal the decision does not work. It would be great if anyone could help to rectificy the issue.

Thank you. Kind regards,
{{SirJamesHunt}}




[[User:SirJamesHunt|SirJamesHunt]] ([[User talk:SirJamesHunt|talk]]) 15:43, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:43, 27 February 2015

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • 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.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


February 21

13:56:34, 21 February 2015 review of submission by Bluerommel


Good Morning. Thanks for the support. I seemed to have put many references. Where do you think are biggest gaps? Can you help me? BR

Bluerommel (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many of your references either do not support the statements that they follow, or do not verify that the individual has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. So for example, the statement in your Draft that Corno became "a member of the National Academy of Engineering" of the University of California at Berkeley, is referenced by a "snipview" ... whatever that may be... that only seems to support the statement that Corno was an alumnus of Bocconi University. And "http://www.goodreads.com" and "http://www.lionsclubs.org/EN/index.php" and similar top level URLs with no further details are of no use as references to prove notability. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 22

01:02:22, 22 February 2015 review of submission by Munozpinedo


Hello, my page draft was rejected for these reasons:

"This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject."

This page is about one exceptional scientist (and I have included links to prove it) and written by another scientist (me). I have tried to include many citations but of course not the 500+ articles and books that Professor Green has published. Could anybody please help me figure out which parts are not written appropriately or they are not properly referenced? Thanks! Cristina Muñoz-Pinedo

Munozpinedo (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)munozpinedo Munozpinedo (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the decline may have been an error, sorry about that. I have now accepted this Draft and it is at Douglas R. Green.
@Onel5969: just to let them know. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Munozpinedo (and thanks for the "ping" Arthur goes shopping) - No, it wasn't in error, although it was definitely a hard decision. One of the phrases which contributed to the tone was removed after I declined it. There are still others, which in my opinion, give it an informal tone, although they are minor, but it is also the use of the honorofic and his full name throughout the article which put it over the edge for me. But that's what makes Wikipedia unique, different editors have different standards. That's one of the reasons that, unless asked by the article's author, I try to avoid re-reviewing an article I've declined. 13:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:07:03, 22 February 2015 review of submission by Chowe9


Hi, I submitted a wikipedia page but it was rejected. I am wondering what changes I need to make in order to make it acceptable. Thanks.

Chowe9 (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:52:32, 22 February 2015 review of submission by JenniferAnneBaker


JenniferAnneBaker (talk) 20:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KITTY BLACK PERKINS

Hi- I need help because my biographical topic is a creative person (the main creator of Barbie designs for Mattel) and I have two news stories that include interviews with her along with a biographical page. I am hoping that African American history gets more attention on wikipedia. That black women do not get the recognition of others seems to be an obstacle to there being additional sources on Kitty Black Perkins. But wouldn't I have met the criteria already?

Hi JenniferAnneBaker. I think that prior to your addition of the 2 new cites, the article was borderline in the notability department. One editor might decline it, while another editor might have passed it. I think the addition of the Spartanburg article nudges it clearly on the side of notability. Article still needs work. References need cleanup (e.g. the Spartanburg article, and the one you have listed for AP, is really from a Toledo newspaper, and the author is the AP). Also, instead of simply just mentioning Ebony, Essence, LA Magazine, Woman's Day, and Sister to Sister magazines, get those citations and put them in the article. I've moved the article into the mainspace, hope you continue to make improvements on it. Onel5969 (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 23

00:12:26, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Jonathan lipworth


Hi, I am a first time user and would greatly appreciate your help improving this article

- I am not sure why the citation style for this article is unclear - I am also not sure as to why the external links don't follow the Wikipedia guidelines - I have 17 citations and noticed from many others pages that some articles have far less than this … is it the quantity or quality of the citations that is the issue? - In addressing the issue of the article being an orphan, is it best to link other Wikipedia articles back to this page? - In the previous round of feedback it was stipulated that I should not use the title Dr or Professor throughout the article - although those are his actual titles. I can't use Mr as that would be incorrect

Many thanks for your help - much appreciated

Jonathan

Jonathan lipworth (talk) 00:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The formatting of the citations is an issue. Merely providing a URL and title, with not even an access date, can lead to link rot. You could look at Wikipedia:Citation templates for different ways to format references, or you could use an existing Wikipedia Good Article about a medical researcher as an example to work from, see Wikipedia:Good articles/Natural sciences#Medical people and institutions.
Yes, articles are orphans when no or few other Wikipedia articles link to the article.
Use no title at all, thus "Korda travelled to New York" is correct. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:12:24, 23 February 2015 review of submission by CountryMusicQueen

I am a representative of Buddy Owens. He owns copyrights to all the information that was added, including the copy but it was denied for copyright issues. Is there a way to have this reconsidered as a page? We'd like his information to be stored here on wikipedia since he is a successful songwriter/country singer. What do we need to do to get the page accepted? Thank you!

CountryMusicQueen (talk) 06:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CountryMusicQueen. Yes, there is a process you can go through to confirm copyright permission. But frankly you shouldn't bother with it, since the bio page is considered promotional (that is, advertising). You should look for independent, reliable sources of information (news articles, magazines, etc.) and rewrite the page in your own words. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 13:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:35:39, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Davebevis

Dear AFC Help Desk,

I submitted a first draft of the article "Draft:George H Widdows" and this was rejected on notability grounds.

I extended the article and submitted it as a second draft. This was rejected on copyright violation grounds and then it was deleted because it met the speedy-deletion criteria.

Having now read the help articles on copyright, plaguarism and paraphrasing, I feel reasonably confident that I can re-work the article to avoid copyright violations. However, I would be grateful if you could confirm a few things about submitting a further (third) draft:

(a) Please can you confirm that my second draft successfully addressed the notability issues that caused my first draft to be rejected?

(b) Please can you confirm that, for my third draft, I will need to re-input the whole article rather than amend the (now-deleted) text that I submitted as my second draft?

(c) Please can you confirm that I can use the same name for my article as I did when I first submitted it?

Davebevis (talk) 10:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see the deleted second Draft, so I will leave an administrator to comment on that.
It is generally easier to start again using your own words entirely rather than work from a version that had copyright problems, however the deleting administrator may possibly be willing to email you the deleted text if you ask them.
Yes you can use the same name for the Draft, or for the article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your advice - it should help me plan how best to re-work the article. I hope to avoid having to contact an administrator to retrieve "lost" text. I intend to rebuild the article via my sandbox and resubmit it from there. Davebevis (talk) 09:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:00:09, 23 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 98.228.102.96


I attempted to submit an article on Vernon Lewis Nickell, Illinois State Superintendent of Public Instruction from 1941 to 1959.

The article appears not to have been accepted, primarily as the wording is similar to Nickell's Find-A-Grave Memorial. The concern with that logic is that I am the author and creator of Vernon's Find-A-Grave Memorial!! Of course my information and writing stype is going to be similar!! There are no copyright or intellectual property issues, as I am the creator/writer of both articles!!

I am not opposed to edits, and believe that I have submitted a good and objective bio-shell for Vernon Lewis Nickell, and want to move it forward. What are my next steps?

Best regards,


98.228.102.96 (talk) 12:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the information at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, which should allow you to get round this issue. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:42:15, 23 February 2015 review of submission by 212.76.225.12


Dear Sir/Madam, I have one question regarding the slipsafe draft article. It was stated by the reviewer that some of the text was taken from the website www.slipsafe.org. Since we, the SlipSafe team, have developed this website and also the descriptions and text about the project, we also wanted to use some of the text for the Wikipedia article. Please note that this is not a copyright issue since it is our website and we have created the text. We have spent quite some time on the text in order to make it comprehensible for the public and explain some quite technical and complicated issues in an understandable way. Therefore, we wanted to use some of this wording also in our Wikipedia article about this project. Changing the description of the whole project would be very difficult since this article is about a technical European project and we have already worked on the text for quite a long time. To incorporate our text in the Wikipedia article, no matter if part of it is also published on our website, should not be a problem, or? Could you please give me some feedback on that issue. Thank you in advance. Best, Eva

212.76.225.12 (talk) 14:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We would need to confirm permission via e-mail. Please follow the instructions at WP:CONSENT and keep in mind:
  • As you are not contributing images, please do not follow the large link to donate images or the link to Wikimedia Commons.
  • When filling out the form letter, please identify both the original URL at slipsafe.org and the URL on Wikipedia.
  • So that we can verify the permission, please send the e-mail from an official contact address (most likely one that ends in @slipsafe.org).
Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:30, 23 February 2015 review of submission by NalaHenkel

Hello! Regarding my article's rejection, can I just remove the section of the article around which copyright is an issue? The text in question was supplied to me by the company, but it may be easier to just remove that section. Also, can I assume there were no other issues with the article, and that after this revision and resubmission it should be approved?

Thank you for your help,

NalaHenkel (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC) NalaHenkel (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To editor NalaHenkel: Hmm... Actually, I don't believe there's a copyright issue. If the only thing that is copied is the text of the law, that should be fine, because everything produced by the U.S. government is in the public domain (not protected by copyright). Or, if there is something else, perhaps Josve05a (the reviewer) can comment here. Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Anon124: Thanks Anon124. If I don't hear further in a couple days, I think I'll just rewrite that "Membership" section and describe generally how people can become a member of a credit union. Then I can direct readers to this credit union's membership page for specific details. Thanks again! NalaHenkel (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:08, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Kencorba


Hello. I am under the impression that my subject is not "notable" enough for approval. Is there anything that I can do to push this through? Or any other way to get the article on Wikipedia?

Kencorba (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Kencorba: The only way is to find more sources: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
If you can't find any more, then it may just be too soon to have an article. Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:32:05, 23 February 2015 review of submission by 206.53.104.44


206.53.104.44 (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO GET THIS PAGE POSTED? THIS IS VERY CONFUSING AND I'M WONDERING IF IT'S EVEN WORTH THE EFFORT. HELP ME OUT HERE. IT'S A SIMPLE POST FOR NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT REALLY HAS NOT MUCH FOR REFERENCES, IT'S BRAND NEW?

HELP......

We can help you only if you tell us what page you're referring to. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:22:05, 23 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by HalinaZakowicz


Matthew Vanitas stated that the Hollow Fiber Bioreactors submission appeared to be a test edit. I am wondering how to correct this problem. I removed an image file from the submission, but otherwise I am notsure why this article is being called an edit. Thank you.

HalinaZakowicz (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HalinaZakowicz don't worry about it, that problem no longer exists as you seem to have expanded the draft substantially. I did a little bit of cleaning up for you, when you are ready for another review just click the blue "Resubmit" button in the pink review box. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:55:27, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Filmfan39

Template:Noah Cowan

My article on Noah Cowan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Noah_Cowan) was declined because it was "not adequately supported by reliable sources." The article currently includes 3 sited sources that are known, reputable online publications. How many more do I need to add for it to be accepted? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. (The username on the article is different, because I was asked to change that as well.)


Filmfan39 (talk) 22:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Filmfan39, I'll try to help you figure it out. Firstly I notice that all three current references are in the last few paragraphs, thus the preceding 80% or so of the article has no sources at all - "Early life", "Early career" and so on is completely unreferenced. How do you know what you wrote in those unreferenced paragraphs? The three sources that are cited are: 1 a major broadcaster - we accept that such a source is both independent and usually reliable; 2 is Cowan's employer - thus it is probably reliable though probably biased but it is definitely not independent; 3 is a blog with no indication of or way to assess its reliability or independence.
The first reference tells us very little about Cowan, it actually only uses him as a source for various "sound bites" about a topic that Cowan was involved in. The second referenced page does not even mention Cowan at all, so why it's even used in the article is a mystery to me. The third source does give some detail about Cowan's career but it appears to be a re-publisher of press releases and promotional material rather than an independently reported news source with full editorial control. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Roger (Dodger67). Thank you for your helpful response. I've gone in and added 7 additional sources throughout the article. Some are from bigger, known magazines/news outlets, some from smaller ones. Hopefully, those will help clear up the problem with getting the article approved. If there is still a problem with it, please let me know. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmfan39 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 24

05:53:12, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Ifylvu


I need help with referencing of my article. This is my first article on wikipedia and I need to get it right? Can I get a first level review before the main wikipedia review?

Ifylvu (talk) 05:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ifylvu - at first glance the referencing seems ok but you have a problem with inline external links - we do not link words or phrases in an article to external websites. Links within the text are only supposed to go to other Wikipedia articles, see WP:Wikilinks for further information. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ifylvu (talk • contribs) 06:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:34:18, 24 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Mthalane6


I was told that my new article contains copyrighted information, and could not be approved.Please assist by specifying the copyrighted area so that I can remove it and re submit.

Mthalane6 (talk) 10:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mthalane6 - it would help if we knew which article you were speaking about. According to your talk page, I'm assuming that you're referring to Draft:Soul Brothers S.A. Since the article has now been blanked, it's difficult to ascertain what was copyrighted. You might ask Josve05a on their talk page, but some of the article seemed to be copied directly from THIS SITE. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:52:31, 24 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Surfacegrafik


What do I have to change in the Biography of Markus Weisbeck? He's a notable Designer, Artist and Professor and all the mentioned sources are verifiable and reliable. Thank you very much for your help and all the best, Florian Feineis surfacegrafik

Surfacegrafik (talk) 12:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Surfacegrafik - I'll try to answer your question. First of all, the entire prose section of the article is completely without references. All 6 of the current citations appear to simply be verification of the existence of certain pieces of the subject's work. There does not appear to be any references as to the subject's notability: "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." We would need articles about the subject. And since this is a BLP, it needs a high degree of citation in the prose section. Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:52:32, 24 February 2015 review of submission by 212.76.225.12


Dear all, I received the information that if I would like to use text from a website, which I created for a project, in the Wikipedia article about the same project, I need to send a Declaration of consent. I chose the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, but then realized that in the text of this declaration there is the following statement: "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."

We, the SlipSafe team, would like to make the content available and usable for everyone, but not for commercial purposes. Therefore, I wanted to ask which license I should use to make sure that the Wikipedia page content about the SlipSafe project cannot be used in a commercial way by everyone.

Best, Eva

212.76.225.12 (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@212.76.225.12: First of all, the CC-By-SA 4.0 license is not backwards compatible with the CC-By-SA 3.0 and GFDL licenses that Wikipedia uses for its text, so you would have to release the text under both Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (“CC BY-SA”) and the GNU Free Documentation License (“GFDL”) licenses instead (the Creative Commons 4.0 license is okay for images, but not for text). As to the second point, the Wikipedia Terms of Use allow anyone to "share and reuse our articles and other media under free and open licenses", and therefore it does not allow content that prohibits commercial use. Do note, however, that if you release your text under CC-By-SA 3.0 that anyone using it for a commercial product would have to release the product that incorporates your text under a similar free license. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The 4.0 license is our standard recommendation for images, so it seems you followed one of the links at WP:CONSENT. Please do not follow any links, and instead use the statement on that page. Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:55, 24 February 2015 review of submission by RainmakerUSA

This article was declined due to copyright issues, but the copyright issues were not identified in the notice that the article was declined. Please help me identify the items that had copyright issues, and I can then fix it. Thank you.

RainmakerUSA 16:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@RainmakerUSA: Any text that you copied from any other website or source is assumed to be under copyright. Please rewrite anything in that draft that you didn't write in your own words (such as the text you copied from http://www.livingplaces.com/OK/Tulsa_County/Tulsa_City.html). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:47:55, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Sonypayyappilly


Hi, I had taken these details from Sundarmenon.com please let me know what all to do to resubmit this article. Sonypayyappilly (talk) 19:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have correctly resubmitted that Draft and it is currently awaiting its next review. You may wish to have a look at Wikipedia:VRS to see how to improve its chances of being approved. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:48:11, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Jasonbagley

I'd like to get a little more help understanding why the page I created was rejected. One of the reasons given was "Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable". Falko has had his street art published in over 8 books, which were all referenced in the page. Maybe I'm not referencing them properly? If you compare his page to a similar graffiti artist, Faith47, they have a similar number of publications, although Faith47 does have more videos. Any help would be much appreciated. Jasonbagley (talk) 19:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Jasonbagley: We need references for the information about Falko, not just references to his publications. Pointing to other articles for comparison is usually not a good idea, but if you want to get an idea of what we're looking for, you can check out the good articles in art and architecture. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 03:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:35:08, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Layla-liveliness


I followed the instructions which were given for creating infobox for my article, however the outcome does not seem to be correct and is different from what appears in a normal infobox. please help! Layla-liveliness (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Layla-liveliness: Fixed in this edit. The ending }} was missing. Anon124 (+2) (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Anon124: Thank you so much for your help. I have also mentioned the names of the developers as well as latest release version, however these don't seem to appear in the infobox either. Could you please guide me on how this could be corrected please?

Layla-liveliness (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:57:13, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Layla-liveliness

I have mentioned the latest release versions, however they do not seem to appear in the infobox when the page is created. How could I overcome this problem? Please help!

Layla-liveliness (talk) 20:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Layla-liveliness. Sorry I didn't find your question earlier. The infobox takes the |developer= and |latest release version= parameters. I've fixed those with this edit; I hope it looks all right. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 03:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:13:14, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Slipvoid

Hey wiki team! I submitted my first Wikipedia article but received a message indicating the article was rejected because the submission was not adequately supported by reliable sources. This confuses me because I took the proper steps to include 9 very credible sources (scientific publications and online magazine articles). Please advise. I'm very excited about this post and will try my best to modify accordingly. Thanks! Slipvoid (talk) 21:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slipvoid, I immediately noticed that the "Early life and education" section has no references at all. Seven of the nine sources cited in the draft are for the Awards list, yet most of the awards are still unsourced. Thus the short answer is; no the nine current sources are not sufficient - they actually tell us very little about Lobe himself. Anything you can't source should be removed - even if "you know it's true". Hope this helps. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:20:29, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Layla-liveliness


Layla-liveliness (talk) 22:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Layla-liveliness. You asked for help but you didn't ask a question. Is there anything we can help you with? — kikichugirl speak up! 07:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:01:00, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Joseph Jensen


Joseph Jensen (talk) 23:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC) I understand that my entry had copyright infringement concerns because I utilized the writing directly off the Flinching Eye Collective's webpage. I got permission from them but did not know how to cite that properly. I have rewritten that portion of my entry keeping the content intact. I just want to make sure that I have properly resubmitted it or if I need to start over with the entire process? Any help will be greatly appreciated.[reply]

I look forward to hearing back from you,

Joseph Jensen

@Joseph Jensen: Even if you got permission, you'd have to prove it somehow - likely by sending an email to permissions@wikimedia.org - see WP:Donating copyrighted materials. Also, consider this:
— kikichugirl speak up! 08:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:04:18, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Steven Paul Fisher


Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have had an entry declined twice in Sandbox and would like to submit a new entry but cant see where to do that.

Steven Paul Fisher

Hi Steven Paul Fisher you can add more sandboxes to your user-space by creating links like this: User:Steven Paul Fisher/Title of new draft. Create the link somewhere convenient such as on your user page, at first the link will be red as the page does not exist yet, click on it and start writing to create the page. The link(s) on your user page will then serve as an easy way for you to keep track of the drafts you are working on. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


February 25

Request on 01:50:05, 25 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Diehardhouston



Diehardhouston (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to edit my post so it will clear submission

@Diehardhouston: Hi, what specifically do you need help with, and where? — kikichugirl speak up! 07:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

03:41:17, 25 February 2015 review of submission by 73.20.51.36


73.20.51.36 (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I'm looking for advice to help get the Digital Folklore Project page accepted for creation. It's currently a project in its initial stages (there's only been one annual #DigitalTrendOfTheYear announced so far), but we're an official project at a land grant, research 1 university, and we'd like people to be able to find information on the project as it grows. Rather than have to backfill the information in the coming years, it would be great to be able to keep the project's Wikipedia page updated from the start as we go.

I noticed that the Native American Mascot Controversy, one of our two runners up for 2014, has its own Wikipedia page, and our project was mentioned in several articles about that controversy. I included one of those article (from the Daily Kos) in the references; would including more help? While the project may seem small and local, the selection committee featured scholars from universities across the country (including the Library of Congress). Would it help to mention that explicitly in the description?

Any advice is much appreciated! Thank you!

(Just a note--I've registered a username: BluePlate55. Not sure if it will automatically link up with my IP address. Sorry. I'm new.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BluePlate55 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately being an official project at a university, and having scholars from other universities involved, are both things that do not contribute to establishing notability. Looking at the Daily Kos item that you included, it appears to be a press release from an initiative that the Digital Folklore Project recognised. It cannot, therefore, be considered an independent source and thus is not useful in proving the notability of the topic. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:59:37, 25 February 2015 review of submission by Leachim 1

Hello, I am trying to submit the article ISA Internationales Stadtbauatelier. My arcticle has been declined several times due to missing references. Now I have added a lot of newspaper articles and webpages to prove my writing. Still it got declined and I do not understand why. Could somebody help me? Thanks in advance. Leachim 1 (talk) 12:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leachim - Missvain gave you a pretty good, succinct explanation: the vast majority of your citations are primary sources. Wikipedia asks for secondary sources. A primary source is any source associated with the subject of the article. Press releases and interviews are primary sources, articles written by the article's subject or a member of the group would also be primary. Onel5969 (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:27:15, 25 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Rich1949


I have been working on a post for a bio for Stan Sofer. Years ago I made my only other posting on Wikipedia about a person named Marc Barhonovich.

Today I got a rejection notice saying that it was an advertisement, and used copyrighted material. That post is ancient and should be deleted, but I don't see how to do so.

If the comment on Copyrighted material is about the Stan Sofer posting, I don't see what material it is, and would just like to delete it to exclude it, but am not sure exactly what to delete.

Any help? I have tried to stick to "just the facts" on the posting, but am new to the rules here. Thanks...


Rich1949 (talk) 14:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rich1949: I'm not sure why you received two notices, but the messages were referring to the content you had at User:Rich1949/sandbox. In general, Wikipedia does not accept content copied and pasted from other sources. Such material is usually copyrighted, and even if it isn't it is usually written in a tone that is too promotional sounding. If you would like a copy of what used to be located at User:Rich1949/sandbox emailed to you, you can request it at WP:REFUND. Before posting the content again, make sure to remove or rewrite anything that wasn't written in your own words. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:46:21, 25 February 2015 review of submission by Leeharrispomeroy


Leeharrispomeroy (talk) 14:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I resubmitted my article on Lee Harris Pomeroy on January 14th but have not had a response. The revised submission had links to numerous Wikipedia pages and other online sources. Please let me know if the re submission has been received and/or what I should do next.

Hi Leeharrispomeroy - it does not appear to have been resubmitted yet. Simply click on the resubmit button in the declined box. Onel5969 (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:12:02, 25 February 2015 review of submission by Simonac80

Hello I submitted an article on the Swiss federal Office of Communications, it is a translation of the article in German. Unfortunately it was not approved because of lacking references. My question is, how can I provide an independent reference for a governmental istitution? The article only presents the area of competence of the organization and the laws to which it is submitted. I find it difficult to find references outside of the organization's website. It is indeed the Federal Council that decided the Office's tasks and competence.

Thank you for your help! Simonac80 (talk) 15:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What about news articles? Surely such an authority will make the news occasionally. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:52:54, 25 February 2015 review of submission by DCFEternal25

I submitted a draft from my sandbox. It was deleted due to copyright infringement. I don't understand copyrights but I contacted the individual whom I was creating a wikipedia article about and got their permission to use the content. Does that still qualify as copyright infringement? Infringement implies that I am doing something without permission. I revised the submission and I assume that was not adequate either. There is certainly going to be some overlap even for a complete rewrite of the article. Is there a limit to the number of pages that can be deleted? I'm trying to learn how to create this article properly.

DCFEternal25 (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@DCFEternal25: In general, Wikipedia does not accept content copied and pasted from other sources. All content on the web is assumed to be under copyright unless it specifically states otherwise. In order to get the proper permission to use the material on Wikipedia you (or the individual in question) would have to follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted material. However, note that material written by the subject of the article by definition has a conflict of interest, as the information that one puts on their own website is generally designed to be promotional sounding. If you want to avoid having your drafts rejected or deleted you should make sure that everything is written in your own words and that you maintain a neutral point of view. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:49:52, 25 February 2015 review of submission by MorganLFeld


Why was my article on the IFFS rejected as "not notable" when several of it's peer associations (ASRM; ESHRE; FIGO) are on Wikipedia and with either fewer citations, or only citations sourced directly from that organization's website? Former committee members include reproductive health pioneers; as I've noted. Current standards on repro-health are in conjunction with the WHO; as I've noted. And there are no less than a dozen separate references to the IFFS on other Wiki articles, again, as pertains to IVF organizations/practitioners. MorganLFeld (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts are reviewed on their own merits, not in comparison with existing articles. The process of fixing or deleting problematic existing articles happens separately. An organisation cannot inherit notability merely because some of its members are notable. Nor are links with other notable organisations a contributing factor in proving notability. Mentions in other Wikipedia articles do not contribute to proving notability. What is required to prove notability of a topic is explained at Wikipedia:VRS... significant coverage in multiple reliable sources all of which are independent of the topic. Further, you cannot copy-paste or closely summarise the organisation's own material in a Wikipedia article, please see Wikipedia:COPYPASTE and Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 26

10:59:17, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Gabrielle122

{{Lafc|username=Template:GABRIELLE122|ts=10:59:17, 26 February 2015|link= why is my article submission decline?

12:31:30, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Ifylvu


Hey there @Dodger67, I have edited the document, Kindly review my article before it is formally reviewed by wikipedia. Thank you Ifylvu (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:55:25, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Ifylvu


Ifylvu (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ifylvu, and welcome! Please feel free to ask your question if you have one. — kikichugirl speak up! 06:35, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:36:51, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Kaptum Edgar


I am a new user. Kaptum Edgar (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kaptum Edgar. This is the AfC help desk. Please feel free to ask your question if you have one. — kikichugirl speak up! 05:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:42:40, 26 February 2015 review of submission by EAACI


EAACI (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How do i upload the image of the person described in the article?

Request on 17:07:42, 26 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 162.211.136.65


I need assistance ensuring that article written need criteria of Wikipedia namely neutral point of view, peacock terms and citing references. 162.211.136.65 (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


February 27

02:41:36, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Jonathan lipworth


Hi, the article is named andrew robert korda and I'd like to change it to andrew korda - I can't see this in the edit options

This may seem like a very dumb question, but a friend helped me to start the page for the first round - so I am not sure if my name was used as the article creator - although the message says I am the creator

Is it possible to check this

Mant thanks

Jonathan


Jonathan lipworth (talk) 02:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonathan lipworth: Hey Jonathan! I've moved your page to Andrew Korda– you can learn moar about moving by checking out WP:MOVE. Congrats on the article! -Newyorkadam (talk) 05:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

04:32:15, 27 February 2015 review of submission by RichLynPalm

My attempt to create a page for myself as a Literary Artist was declined. I am a living American Poet and writer, a fact that I can prove. If T.S. Eliot or hollywood people can have pages why can't I? RichLynPalm (talk) 04:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@RichLynPalm: Hi Richard– I'm the one who declined your article. I left the following comment: "We need moar information on Palmer. Please also add references from reliable sources that prove Palmer's notability and the correctness of this article." To expound on this, there are a few major issues with the article. First, there is hardly any information on you. We are only given your birthdate and a list of your works. We need much moar information on you; examples of this include childhood, career, what critics think of your work, etc. Another issue is that you are writing an article about yourself. While this isn't necessarily against Wikipedia's rules, it's generally advised against, as this can be seen as a conflict of interest, meaning that you will be biased toward yourself; bias is not allowed on Wikipedia. Please see this link for moar information on writing with a neutral point of view. Finally, according to Wikipedia's guidelines, not everyone should have their own article. If everyone got their own article, Wikipedia would be much harder to maintain and would have tons of problems with neutral points of view and other things. To fix this, Wikipedia has a guideline called notability; this determines whether or not someone is notable enough to be on Wikipedia. According to Wikipedia's guidelines on notability for authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals, the following criteria must be met for a person in that profession to have an article:
  1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
  2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
  3. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
  4. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
If you can prove these things in your article, it will be accepted. If you aren't sure if you pass one or moar of these rules, let me know and I'll try to help you. Please note that you must include references to prove what you write is true. Please respond here or leave a message on my talk page if you have any moar questions, and good luck! -Newyorkadam (talk) 05:34, 27 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

05:47:23, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Saruchey


Request on 06:11:48, 27 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 202.59.227.245


I tried to set up a page for my son Cameron Clark Rugby but it was not successful. Since then the Australian Rugby Union has started a page. Do I try to set up my original page or simply try to submit new material to the existing page.

Thanks


202.59.227.245 (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:41:31, 27 February 2015 review of submission by DmitryPopovRU


Hi Wikipedia Editors! Please have a look at this page and if you can please help work on it with the way its written please let me know! This has been deleted before but I think because it was worded incorrectly. The sources are notable and reliable! I mean they are from the biggest media outlets in NZ. I just need advise and an editors help!

Thank You! спасибо! --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 11:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DmitryPopovRU (talk) 11:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:46:31, 27 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Tsssr.prasad


BFF Metric has evolved as a by-product of our conversation on Visual Communication in Linkedin

(https://www.linkedin.com/groups/What-Amount-Visual-Communication-can-4652376.S.5974746040958537730?view=&gid=4652376&type=member&item=5974746040958537730#commentID_null)

I need the definition of this QA Metric to be available to the general public thru Wiki.

Please help me in this process

Tsssr.prasad (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:04:28, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Habatchii


Thank you for your consideration. The topic article 'False production' has been deemed inadmissible for inclusion on the basis that it was stated as not having a substantial social definition. Yet, the topic has been cited by administrative and judicial bodies on a global scale and proportion. Argument in favor of inclusion is supported by notable usage, of which ends and social acceptance justifies its means of definition.

With respect for the staff of Wikipedia, a general quiry of reference may substantiate viability of inclusion. The support of legal notes, citations, codification and other official processes may also not be admissible by Wikipedia standards, due to the nature of administration in which they are used in legal settings. I am by no means stating Wikipedia should expand its definition of neologism to include the omission of legal processes. The topic of legal situations in general should be under a separate custodianship that the legal community may research its content for viability and authoritative referencing.

Accordingly, hundreds of thousands of instances on the topic of false production can be inquried over the world wide web; including news articles, books, court hearings and pictures. Wikipedia's stance on substantiating a foundation of definitive references should be waived in 'special circumstances of public and social importance or significance'; as in the case of such a working phrase as 'false production'. I am in open dialogue with the Smithsonian Institute and the United States Library of Congress to more thoroughly reference this topic and its matriculation within governmental, corporate and institutional systems. I do strongly encourage the staff of Wikipedia to redact its position on legal neologism entries into the encyclopedia and include a well structured article on the positive and negative perspectives of the false production article.

Thank you again in advance for your swift and professional response. Habatchii (talk) 13:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:41:44, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Steven Paul Fisher


Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had an article in Sandbox rejected because it does not have footnotes. I have had a number of previous entriesl accepted without footnotes and wondered why I need them for this one.

Steven Paul Fisher Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:43:31, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Template:Anthony Bradbury


The submitted articles Draft:Soft Robotics has been rejected by and marked for speedy deletion. Unfortunately, numerous attempts to contact the reviewer Template:Anthony Bradbury to clarify the issues were futile. He might be too busy. I am afraid, that the whole article might be deleted and the work of numerous people will be lost. The issue seems to be a copyright infringement, but we don't have access to the draft and therefore we can not delete the picture or get the missing copyright information. Also the link to rebuttal the decision does not work. It would be great if anyone could help to rectificy the issue.

Thank you. Kind regards, Template:SirJamesHunt



SirJamesHunt (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=649099222"