Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 October 27

< 2011 October 26

2011 October 27

2011 October 28 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U._Ray_and_Sons

Please help me out with a review to check if this article is acceptable or not. Thanks!

BanerjeeSohini (talk) 11:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Thousand Years

This page was created on October 27, 2011. The wish for review is because of the wanting to rate the page. Awaiting reply. Thanks

Sghotankar (talk) 13:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

example/Lorenzo_Gaztañaga

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenzo_Gaztañaga

Looking for overall feedback, as this is my first official post. Also the ñ in his name/url... will that exclude anyone spelling/searching without the tilde? If yes, can I create a redirect link from the Americanized spelling "Gaztañaga"? Finally, I'd like to add/link to a picture. Is that uploaded to the wiki site, or can it be hosted where it currently lives?

Thanks in advance!

Danthereed (talk) 13:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Allison_Rubacky/Princeton_Marketing_Group

Requesting any and all feedback. Much appreciated. Also, will my username be removed if I submit the article to go live? If not, how do I remove it from the page title?

Allison Rubacky (talk) 14:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Francesco Guccini

Hello, I have made a complete rewrite of the article about the Italian singer-songwriter Francesco Guccini, and I would like to receive some feedback/comments/criticism/tips.
I mainly translated from the corresponding article on Italian Wikipedia (which is an FA)
Here is the Diff link. Thanks in advance! Zidanie5 (talk) 14:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OpenRAW

I moved this to make it visible about 2 weeks ago. This page has since been edited twice by others, but without removing the "New unreviewed article" template. Removing that would be a useful step forward.

Perhaps unusually, there are probably more references than would normally be used for this amount of text. (And I discarded some of the references I first put in). I think the text needs expanding, but don't know how far to go before it becomes "original research" rather than paraphrasing and easy-reading and clarification.

Thanks to anyone who spends time on this. And a special thanks to anyone already familiar with OpenRAW and can add to the article! Barry Pearson 18:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hampshire County Architects

This is a new article about an architectural studio well known in architectural and construction circles. It needs reviewing by someone other than the author.

Sionk (talk) 18:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled я являюсь родственником семьи рокфеллеров.имеются доказательства,очень старые личные фотографии.моя бабушка по маминой линии...

Lomoyan (talk) 20:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rubinm/Sow-Hsin_Chen

Thank you again for your feedback, and for your patience with my sincere and inexperienced attempt to contribute. (Professor Chen is well-known within his field, and I had incorrectly thought that I had to back up his information with primary source references and papers, which I have now removed.) As you recommended, I have attempted to summarize Professor Chen's information, and referenced only secondary sources. I hope that this meets acceptable standards for submission. Thank you again, Rubinm (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great! You are obviously very thorough, I'm sure you'll make a great Wikipedian! I would add, there's no need for the article to be perfect and complete before you make it 'live'. As long as the key points are verified, that's the important thing. I did a quick online search and came across Whatever Happened to the Hydrogen Car? which you might want to use - newspapers are good citations and tend to pick-up on notable things, adding credence to your article. Sionk (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I have submitted Chen's page and it is now waiting review and hopefully, approval. And thank you for reminding me about the popular applications of Chen's research on the science of water, which also include why certain trees do not grow above the treeline, and how the properties of water affect cement strength in industrial applications. Rubinm (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The addition and use of references to secondary sources is right. But does that mean that references to primary sources should be removed? Why? In the proper (verified) context, they can be valuable. Barry Pearson 18:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I suggested primary sources shouldn't be used. WP Reliable sources simply says they should be used with caution. On an earlier comment I pointed out that some of the sources used by Rubinm didn't actually back up the claims they were citing. In those instances a different (better) source would be needed. Sionk (talk) 22:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sionk was absolutely correct, and I rearranged the location and format of my primary and secondary sources to more accurately support my claims. Rubinm (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. His MIt faculty page is linked under external references, and the footnotes in the first paragraph (2,3,4,5,6) are the journals produced from the papers delivered at the special conferences held in his honor. If I clarify that, does that help qualify this article? The honors are all cited by press releases listed in the references. Rubinm (talk) 11:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

23 of your 27 citations are to scientific papers, it seems. The tail is wagging the dog here, so to speak. You need to cite secondary sources of your claims, not cite the subject of the claim. A paper produced at a conference doesn't prove that the conference was convened in his honour, it only shows the conference took place. Secondly, a lot of the article is copy-pasted from Sow-Hsin Chen's online CV http://web.mit.edu/nse/pdf/faculty/chen/chen_cv.pdf. This is self-published by the subject, so not acceptable for Wikipedia. It is also disingenuous of you! If someone is notable they will have independent proof available somewhere. On a minor point, Wikipedia cannot cite itself as a source - 2 of your sources are Wikipedia articles! Overall I would suggest you find a few independent authoritative sources for your key points and summarise the biography, rather than copy-and-paste. WP:SCG might also help you. Sionk (talk) 12:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new contributor, and wish to add a Wikipedia page on Sow-Hsin Chen, a living scientist who is internationally known and respected in the field of Applied Radiation Physics. He has published over 400 peer-reviewed articles, received prestigious awards, spoken at innumerable international conferences, and would be a valuable addition to the Wikipedia. Would you please review my draft contribution and offer feedback? Many thanks. Rubinm (talk) 11:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rubinm (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a physicist, so I can't understand most of the impenetrable jargon, but I would suggest you need to cite some references to prove this man's notability. For example, he is a Professor at MIT, he allegedly has conferences convened in his honour and he has allegedly received numerous awards. These things would make him 'notable' in Wikipedia guidelines, but none of these things have proof yet. You need to concentrate on finding independent sources of evidence to prove these 'notable' facts. Sionk (talk) 23:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So Shim Sa Zen Center

Can someone please edit this article to fit the WP guidelines. It needs to be edited by someone other than the author

Myongahn (talk) 22:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]