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
Line 56: Line 56:


:If you want to upload, it's actually pretty simple. On the left side toolbar, there is a "tools" section. Click on the "Upload file". It brings you to the upload wizard. If you're going to upload on Wikipedia, simply click on the big "Click here to start the Upload Wizard", and then follow the instructions (they are pretty self-explanatory). If you want to add on Commons, below that big Upload Wizard is a box, and in the box in the upper left hand corner is "Commons", the first selection under that is "Commons Wizard", click that and it will take you to Commons. Commons is actually even easier to upload on. If you have any further questions, a better venue to ask is at [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. Hope this helps. [[User:onel5969|<b><font color="#536895">Onel</font><font color="#FFB300">5969</font></b>]] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup> 12:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
:If you want to upload, it's actually pretty simple. On the left side toolbar, there is a "tools" section. Click on the "Upload file". It brings you to the upload wizard. If you're going to upload on Wikipedia, simply click on the big "Click here to start the Upload Wizard", and then follow the instructions (they are pretty self-explanatory). If you want to add on Commons, below that big Upload Wizard is a box, and in the box in the upper left hand corner is "Commons", the first selection under that is "Commons Wizard", click that and it will take you to Commons. Commons is actually even easier to upload on. If you have any further questions, a better venue to ask is at [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. Hope this helps. [[User:onel5969|<b><font color="#536895">Onel</font><font color="#FFB300">5969</font></b>]] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup> 12:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

::Hello [[User:Onel5969]]. "Is it copyrighted material? If so, you can't add it on Commons" - this is not quite right. If the image is copyrighted and Ratz haut owns the copyright, then Ratz haut can indeed upload it to Commons if he is willing to freely license it. Freely licensed is not the same thing as "not copyrighted".

:I wonder if the problem is the use of a PDF file instead of an image format such as GIF or PNG. JPEG would also work although is less suitable for this type of image. [[User:Arthur goes shopping|Arthur goes shopping]] ([[User talk:Arthur goes shopping|talk]]) 11:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


== Request on 13:10:09, 19 October 2015 for assistance on [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC]] submission by LaSch ==
== Request on 13:10:09, 19 October 2015 for assistance on [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC]] submission by LaSch ==

Revision as of 11:06, 22 October 2015

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)		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


October 16

07:27:09, 16 October 2015 review of submission by Wordsprite


Here is my question, I have two different messages and I'm confused: Are my references not reliable OR is the problem (why my article was rejected) one of citation? Check these out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wordsprite   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Psychoterratic_Illnesses   click on both and tell me which one is correct and whether the problem is unreliable references or if it’s citation problems.Wordsprite (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reason it was declined is the referencing isn't the style we use on wikipedia, WP:Refbegin will help you see the style, and using something like User:ProveIt GT will help you put inline citations in your article without having to type everything out over again. Hope I helped! --  Kethrus |talk to me  13:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:09:06, 16 October 2015 review of submission by Karen Douglass



Hello!

Could you please help me with this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Airy I have done all required changes but my submission was declined. Bu checking the apps from this comparison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_YouTube_downloaders I can't understand how my page differs from another pages devoted to the apps of such kind Karen Douglass (talk) 14:09, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Karen Douglass - I responded to you on my talk page back on the 13th. Did you not see that message? Regarding the other article, per WP:OSE the fact that there are other bad articles isn't an excuse to allow other promotional articles to be included. I also didn't get in to the notability of the subject, but after a quick glance, most of the citations appear to be from blogs, which are not usually considered reliable sources, and some from non-independent sources as well. Not saying it's not notable, simply that I haven't evaluated it in that respect yet, but be careful of sourcing with blogs. WP:RS is a good resource for understanding reliable sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:20, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:41, 16 October 2015 review of submission by Razz singh sinsinwar


Razz singh sinsinwar (talk) 14:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

please help me to create an article in simple steps and tell me can i create an article to promote any thing or not . I just want to share some information about a site on wilipedia can i use it or not. please tell me all the restriction for this site to upload and article here. please reply soon . shukriya....

Hi Razz singh sinsinwar. Another editor (SwisterTwister) has put together a pretty nice succinct group of links to help new editors.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Onel5969 TT me 15:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:39:15, 16 October 2015 review of submission by 66.199.221.84


66.199.221.84 (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Flibanseran The magic ingrediant in wine that has aphrodesiac qualities.[reply]

Are you telling us something or asking us something? I see no draft created or edited by this IP address. Fiddle Faddle 16:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 18

05:38:22, 18 October 2015 review of submission by IJBall


This draft, which I have been working on, was just submitted for AfC review by an IP editor. I feel like nothing has changed since this draft was last rejected by AfC several months back (i.e. the BLP of the article in question is still just short of notability under WP:NACTOR), and I would like to withdraw or suspend this submission – how can I do that? (Or can I even do that to a submission for AfC review from another editor?...) Thanks in advance.

--IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@IJBall: You could revert their submission by removing the {{AFC submission ...}} template from the draft, but that would be a very unusual thing to do. They have every right to submit the draft. I recommend letting the process run its course. You can continue to improve the draft while waiting for a reviewer to get to it. If it's declined then you're no worse off than when you started. Worldbruce (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's just that's nothing has really changed on this one since the last submission. If this kid ever gets a semi-decent movie role, then I think he'll pass WP:NACTOR, and the draft will be approved and moved to mainspace. But I'm pretty sure whoever reviews this for AfC this time which just decline again, so it's kind of a waste of an AfC reviewer's time, that's all... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined as predicted, but more to clear the pool of drafts requiring review. I agree that he fails notability at present. Fiddle Faddle 19:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 19

07:12:38, 19 October 2015 review of submission by Fnorp


I don't get it. How is this architect not notable enough? Almost every person who ever got paid for kicking a ball has an article, but an architect who designed dozens of buildings on both sides of the Atlantic can not have one? The only explanation I get is a couple of links to some of the far too many (usually very much hidden and quite incomprehensible) guidelines. Finding references isn't easy, and adding them is a hell of a job. Where's all the fun gone? Why not simply accept this subject as a stub if it doesn't meet all the requirements. Surely there were enough sources mentioned? There has been an article about this architect on the Dutch Wikipedia for four years already. I thought it was encouraged to translate such articles?

Fnorp (talk) 07:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fnorp. I agree with you re the notability. I note that another of his buildings in Louisville (The Cumberland/York Towers) is on the National Register of Historic Places. See [1]. I'm signing off for the day. But tomorrow I'm going to move this into article space, and I'll expand further on your talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:23:30, 19 October 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Footballerwantsawife


Hi My name is Ben Nicholas (writer/creator/producer and star of the new series Footballer Wants A Wife [1] Im hoping to create the page for our new series and having some trouble...i have been able to add some details but would love to add more as its am all star studded cast.

Im also having trouble adding a photo to my own page Ben Nicholas I have several appropriate photos bit for some reason i am unable to load them up...hopefully you can help me with that...

References

  1. ^ http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1503766/

Footballerwantsawife (talk) 08:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be here to publicise yourself. That will always fail. Please be very careful to read and understand WP:COI. Fiddle Faddle 17:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:13:46, 19 October 2015 review of draft by Ratz haut


Ratz haut (talk) 09:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC) Hi, I'm trying to upload an image onto our page. It seems that I have put it into Wikipedia commons - can I take it from there to include on our page? If so, how do I do that? If not, what can I do to use this image on our page? Thanks (& apologies if these are really dumb questions!) I'd be grateful for really simple-to-follow guidelines![reply]

Hi Ratz haut - not stupid at all. The first question is regarding its copyright. Is it copyrighted material? If so, you can't add it on Commons. If not, you are encouraged to do so. If it is copyrighted, there are still cases where you can use it under a fair use doctrine. WP:IUP is a nice link which goes over our image use policy, and WP:FAIRUSE goes over the fair use doctrine, and when you can and can't use non-free images.
If you want to upload, it's actually pretty simple. On the left side toolbar, there is a "tools" section. Click on the "Upload file". It brings you to the upload wizard. If you're going to upload on Wikipedia, simply click on the big "Click here to start the Upload Wizard", and then follow the instructions (they are pretty self-explanatory). If you want to add on Commons, below that big Upload Wizard is a box, and in the box in the upper left hand corner is "Commons", the first selection under that is "Commons Wizard", click that and it will take you to Commons. Commons is actually even easier to upload on. If you have any further questions, a better venue to ask is at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello User:Onel5969. "Is it copyrighted material? If so, you can't add it on Commons" - this is not quite right. If the image is copyrighted and Ratz haut owns the copyright, then Ratz haut can indeed upload it to Commons if he is willing to freely license it. Freely licensed is not the same thing as "not copyrighted".
I wonder if the problem is the use of a PDF file instead of an image format such as GIF or PNG. JPEG would also work although is less suitable for this type of image. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:10:09, 19 October 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by LaSch


Hi, I need help with my article. A reviewer declined it and said, it would sound like an advertisment. I do not think so, but if others maybe think the same, then I would like to know, which sentences or passages are promotional, so I can change them. It would be great, if some of you could help me, so that my article gets accepted. Many thanks, LaSch.

LaSch (talk) 13:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be blunt, but almost all of it sounds promotional to me. To be accepted, the Draft would need to focus on concrete facts, backed by sources, rather than the sort of things one would read in a corporate brochure.
  • increase organizations’ innovation capacity and competitiveness through a systematic approach to Innovation Management
  • an online tool to benchmark important aspects of Innovation Management with innovation support services such as training and certification in Innovation Management, consulting and technical assistance as well as research on innovation topics
  • offering and expanding the established services on an ongoing basis
  • maintains an advisory board with members from various sectors
  • to develop and render better services in support of Innovation Management
  • developed and implemented the various IMP³rove services on an international scale
The lengthy details about a non-notable award are also unnecessary. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It also currently does not satisfy Wikipedia:VRS (most of the sources provided are associated with the organization) so it would be rejected on those grounds even if the promotional language were removed. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 20

Request on 07:19:52, 20 October 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Mahi Ashraf



Mahi Ashraf (talk) 07:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? "Mahi is a good boy" is to be an article? Fiddle Faddle 08:24, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:07:12, 20 October 2015 review of submission by Lambao.truong

Hi, I'd like to know which sources on my Draft:Spireon page are not reliable/notable?

1) "Notice of Exempt Offering of Securities: Spireon". U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Retrieved 20 October 2015.

2) "Company Overview of Spireon, Inc.". Bloomberg Business. Retrieved 20 October 2015.

3) "Company Data: Spireon". U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Retrieved 20 October 2015.

4) "Bertram Capital Portfolio Company, ProconGPS, Inc. Announces Name Change to Spireon, Inc.". Bertram Capital. Retrieved 20 October 2015.

--Lambao.truong (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2015 (UTC) Lambao.truong (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambao.truong: Hi, I was the reviewer on Draft:Spireon. I'll flesh out some of my reasoning here:
  1. The SEC article does not offer substantive content about the company other than filing and securities minutiae.
  2. The Bloomberg Business overview has no substantive content that shows notability per WP:CORPDEPTH. It summarizes that the company exists but does not explain why they are notable. Many, many companies have Bloomberg profiles and SEC filings, but this does not make them notable.
  3. This SEC document falls prey to the same problems as the first SEC reference.
  4. This article is a PR/primary source that is not suitable for demonstrating notability.
Let me know if you have further questions about these sources. Thanks,/wia /tlk /cntrb 16:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:05:10, 20 October 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Hurryupsisprod


I am requesting assistance about my page on the documentary film "No Job For a Woman": The Women Who Fought to Report WWII. I used the Wikipedia page on "The Hunting Ground" a documentary by Kirby Dick as a template for my page. I hewed fairly closely to what they did and am wondering how I can edit the "No Job For a Woman" page to meet the standards you are looking for> Should I delete the Home Media section? Should I rewrite the Content section to make it shorter? Please let me know what else I can do to fix the page. Many thanks.

Hurryupsisprod (talk) 19:05, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When using an existing article as a comparison or an example to work from, it would be better to use a recognised Wikipedia Good Article. You could look at some of the non-fiction items in Wikipedia:Good articles/Media and drama#2010s films. A Draft need not be quite so comprehensive or comprehensively referenced as these to be accepted, but they can help to give an idea of the sort of sources, sourcing, and tone that is required.
Among specific problems that your Draft has at the moment is that the "Special Screenings" section should be removed entirely except for any that have been reported on by independent reliable sources, likewise "Awards, Honors and Funding" needs some but perhaps not quite as much trimming, and external links (for example to the Women Make Movies website) should not be in the body of the Draft. You also don't seem to have any coverage of critical reception of the film, which as you will see from the Good Articles linked above, is normally a key component.
Many reviewers are more positive about Drafts that use inline citations for referencing sources. This is because it makes it possible to see which information came from which source. You can find more about how to add inline citations at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:00, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:11:27, 20 October 2015 review of submission by DmitryPopovRU


Hello Wikipedia Editors,

Regarding the following page Draft:Alex Gilbert So this page was deleted and was not told to come back on Wikipedia again. Though new reliable sources for this article have appeared online. How can I resubmit this?

Here are all the sources along with new ones.

DmitryPopovRU (talk) 20:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Provided your new draft is substantially different from any prior draft or article you may start to create it, may work on it and may submit it for review. You need to judge whether the gentleman passes WP:BIO and whether your references meet our needs. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
I am not commenting upon your list of references. Please compare them with our requirements before deciding whether to move forward or not.
Be aware that notability is not negotiable. You must assert it, and verify it with references. Because the article has been deleted in the past you must do an even more thorough job with referencing than any prior attempt.
You should engage the admin who deleted the prior article(s) in a conversation before proceeding. While not mandatory it is highly advisable. Fiddle Faddle 21:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
However, the gentleman appears to be subject to WP:BLP1E. In general it is very unlikely that he will make the grade. Fiddle Faddle 22:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fiddle. He actually covers other topics not directly linking to just his adoption. I am trying to restore the source so I can work on it.

Thanks- Dmitry --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 05:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@DmitryPopovRU: What he covers is not really relevant. What is relevant is what others over about him. Fiddle Faddle 13:54, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:37:50, 20 October 2015 review of submission by 74.101.203.117

Hello, and welcome to the Help Desk. Do you have a specific question about the draft article? /wia /tlk /cntrb 12:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 21

13:57:27, 21 October 2015 review of submission by LMJones81

Hi

I received the following advice on my declined article and wanted to ask if someone could help me to write this in an acceptable way?

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 promote the subject.

Much appreciated!

The Draft article was for Centre for Justice.


LMJones81 (talk) 13:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MJones81: You don't seem to have left a message, did you write it within the template accidentally? --  Kethrus |talk to me  14:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have tidied this message up to show the right article and the question now attributed to LMJones81.
It is unlikely, though possible, that someone else will pick this up. Far better would be that you continue to revise it in line with our needs, assuming it to be notable in the first place. Fiddle Faddle 16:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:44:45, 21 October 2015 review of submission by West32


I've added sources and additional content to the article that address the reviewers original objections. West32 (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Draft is now awaiting review and will be reviewed when a reviewer gets to it. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 22

04:23:43, 22 October 2015 review of submission by 66.87.142.72


66.87.142.72 (talk) 04:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC) Why was my article totally wiped out deleted where I had no chance to edit it[reply]

10:35:44, 22 October 2015 review of draft by Cratloenationalschool70


Cratloenationalschool70 (talk) 10:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When I go into preview, my info box is just a line of text. How do I create an info box in the top right hand corner of my page

Susan

Hello Susan. The problem was fixed in this edit by Voceditenore. I think the problem was a missing }} at the end. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Susan, yes I've fixed the box for you. I should tell you though, that generally speaking, primary schools do not have stand-alone articles on Wikipedia unless they are of great historic significance and/or have been written about extensively by independent sources. Note also, that at the moment your draft is written like a brochure for the school, rather than an encyclopedia article. You might want to look at the tips and guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines. Voceditenore (talk) 10:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=686948681"