Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 June 27
I am not the original writer of this article, but it was tagged as not having any references. I added some material to the article and included references. Also, I broke the article down into sections and added headings. Is this an improvement over how the article was originally? If others could have a look, that would be great. Does it contain sufficient references to warrant removal of the 'references' tag? Thanks :)
Here is the diff link: [1]
- It's got a few references so you can remove the tag, but you could always add more inofrmation, sources and an infobox. I hope this helps, Thanks, Rock drum Ba-dumCrash 12:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help! Much appreciated. :) I'll continue working on it and will heed your suggestions. Best, Pianotech (talk) 13:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
I've created my first Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Terlato). I believe it is correct, well researched and based on reliable sources. I've looked at the page and at the head it says, "This page is a new unreviewed article. This template should be removed once the page has been reviewed by someone other than its creator." My question is, do I need to ask for the article to be reviewed or will that simply happen if I'm patient? Thanks in advance.
- Hi Petemay. There were some issues with the referencing style, you should place the references within the <ref></ref> parameters and then add {{reflist}} at the bottom of the page rather than using the footnote method. As for the template, it'll be removed in due time once someone comes across the article. -Reconsider! 11:21, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Good article, and I like that you added an infobox. The song discography is very complete and I like how it's bulleted. Good job! I think a few more verifiable sources would help a lot. Citing IMDB can be iffy in some instances, and I notice the IMDB page for this person provides very little information. Also, your references aren't displaying properly. When you edit the article, pull down the help menu and highlight "references" and you'll see the proper coding so they'll display right. You also might want to list a few categories the article can go in for easier search. I think once these few things are addressed it'll be a good, informative article and ready to go. Good work and good luck with it! Pianotech (talk) 11:47, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
RIWAYAT (Band)
[edit]please check my article Riwayat (talk) 14:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Would love to, but you left no link. :)
- The link is Riwayat (death metal). I see someone has said that the article may meet the requirements for speedy deletion. Are there any reliable sources that have covered the band? For example, an article in a newsapaper or magazine. Even if the article is in Malay, that is OK. Yaris678 (talk) 21:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- I tried Googling and found the band's Myspace and Facebook pages, as well as a few sites that host the band's music, but couldn't find any articles. Maybe someone else would care to look also? Pianotech (talk) 23:12, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- The link is Riwayat (death metal). I see someone has said that the article may meet the requirements for speedy deletion. Are there any reliable sources that have covered the band? For example, an article in a newsapaper or magazine. Even if the article is in Malay, that is OK. Yaris678 (talk) 21:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sanjaychitale/Kedar_naphade, Hi , I am kind of stuck at organizing the references, Please help. Thanks
[edit]Hello. I appreciate any input to my article about Canadian artist James Picard. Ridiculously, I cannot see how to change the article name which should be, simply James Picard Perhaps that can only happen after the template is changed? Thank you for your time and input.
~~Shelley 17:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have corrected the problem. I have to say, the new system for people to post here seems to be misunderstood almost as much as the old system! Yaris678 (talk) 22:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you Yaris678 - I managed to figure it out too, but I appreciate your help. I could see the error I made in the link , but there was no edit button beside it for awhile. I figured perhaps that meant someone else was editing. So I was reading Helpfiles to confirm. Is that the case? If someone is editing an article, it is locked for other edits? --Shelley 03:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
This article on my user page is about Canadian artist James Picard. I appreciate input. Thank you for taking the time to look.
PS sorry about the first botched attempt at Request for Feedback earlier today without a proper link.. I cannot seem to edit it to fix it so started over.
~~Shelley 20:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Very well written, and appears to be well-sourced. I think you've done a very good job. :) Tip: Always sign your messages by typing four tildes; this will add your signature, link to your page and time stamp to the post. All the best, Pianotech (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. I would say this article could be moved to main space. I made a couple of tweaks - I hope you don't mind. I added an infobox and changed the point about his change of name to a footnote - it seemed to spoil the flow to mention the change of name before you had talked about his work as an artist.
- One suggestion for further improvement is that I would stick all the lists near the end, rather than break up the article with them like you do. Take a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (layout).
- Yaris678 (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Pianotech, thanks for your positive comments and the tip. I feel relieved! I appreciate your input.
- Hi Yaris, I don't mind the tweaks, thanks for your help. I wondered about where to introduce the name change detail. The info box looks good around the image. I'll consider your suggestion of moving the lists... really there is only one long one, that is achievements. Shelley 03:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah - having a single section for the lists makes sense. You can always break it up with subheadings. Yaris678 (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
We have revised the deleted Irving Literary Society article from last spring, and have recreated it having addressed, we think, the tone, notability, citation and essay form concerns of the last review. Posting here form comment.
Could you please provide feedback on this submission for a wikipedia page? Thank you--appreciate any help.
-->~~Hoops78 (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I have edited a few articles and am excited about writing my first one! I tried to make it informative and impartial. And I have a ton of very credible magazine and TV news sources. Please give me feedback so that I can add it as a Wikipedia article. Thanks, Jeff
- Well it looks like you're off to a great start! You certainly got the hang of referencing and wiki-markup. As for the subject matter I do have some concerns. I'm not convinced on this website's notability.. it would help if you assert its importance more, tell us WHY this website is special enough to be in an encyclopedia. Also, the lead reads a little bit like a brochure.. it's not overly promotional but, funny as this may sound, in this case you WANT to go for as bland, boring, and objective as possible, yet still be able to trump up its significance.. it's not easy to do. :)—Preceding unsigned comment added by OlEnglish (talk • contribs) 07:17, 30 June 2010