Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 April 17

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

User:WLP/Boston University International Affairs Association

This is the official wiki page for the Boston University International Affairs Association, one of the largest and most active student organizations on campus. We have substantial web-presence, and a long list of members and alumni. The next step in our organization is to get a functioning wikipedia page running to archive our organization.

I'd appreciate any help in the review process, and will help answer any questions!

WLP (talk) 01:03, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It appears you're misunderstanding how Wikipedia works; it's not webhosting for organisations, it's for pages about subjects. A Wikipedia page simply cannot be the "official" page for an organisation, and members of BUIAA cannot "own" the page or have any more right to edit it than any other editor. The page is also not yet ready to be an article yet, as it does not have proper footnotes documenting Notability; per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) articles on organisations are required to have multiple third-party, neutral references establishing their importance. So, a few things to work on, and I'd definitely recommend you also read WP:Conflict of interest to be aware of our very strict limits on people writing about organisations they represent. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I understand how wikipedia works, and I appreciate your feedback. What I am concerned about is your idea that I am trying to create a webpage for the organization, when in fact we already have an official page and sites with great SEO. Rather, I am attempting to document the organization since it is one of the premier organizations at Boston University and deserves recognition. Thousands of new students and parents google our organization, and it is worth adding a wiki page to describe in a non-biased way what it is and what it does.

I understand that footnotes and citations are important, and I will work to make those more prevalent throughout the article.

No worries, just wanted to make sure you weren't trying to have a Wikipedia article to serve as a mouthpiece for the organisation, list upcoming events, etc. Though it's okay to occasionally quote from the primary source, it should be done in a rather limited way, and external sources used as the preferred option. Do note that although involved people are not totally forbidden from editing articles, Conflict of Interest is a pretty huge issue, so you do want to be transparent about what you're doing. If we seem picky about this, it's because there are always businesses and organizations trying to control the article about themselves, since it's a big Google hit. Including organisations insisting we delete their article because it contains negative (though properly cited) information; in which case they're told tough luck. Again, nothing personal, but since you're an organisation member creating a page about your organisation, please bear in mind the following:

Wikipedia's Law of Unintended Consequences If you write in Wikipedia about yourself, your group, your company, or your pet idea, once the article is created, you have no rights to control its content, and no right to delete it outside our normal channels. Content is irrevocably added with every edit, and once added will not be deleted just because the author doesn't like it any more. Any editor has the right to add or remove material to the article within the terms of our content policies. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually. More than one user has created an article only to find themselves presented in a poor light long-term by other editors. If you breach our editing policies or "edit war" in an attempt to obtain a version of your liking you are likely to have your editing access removed. In addition, if your article is found to not be worthy of inclusion in the first place, it will be deleted, as per our deletion policies. Therefore, don't create promotional or other articles lightly, especially on subjects you care about.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Movie production incentives in the United States

This article was created by a group of students in the Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy. As first-time editors, we're seeking feedback on the content and style of the article. Any comments are appreciated.

Dglasser13 (talk) 01:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Overall looks pretty solid, though your cats were slightly off. Category:Films is for the actual films themselves, whereas Category:Film is about the field in general. Production funding seems like it would go in Category:Film making, so I moved it there, though maybe it could be further categorised if there is any cat with other articles about film finance. I also added Category:Subsidies. On the Talk page I added WP:WikiProject Film. By the way, have you dropped into their WikiProject to say hello and show them your page? You might get some even better technical feedback there. This page is more for technical help with formatting, structure, referencing, etc., but I think I got you a few little tweaks on that angle. One other suggestion: try using a variety of search engines to see if you can find any mention on WP of a film being "incentivised", and then wikilink that portion to your article to better tie-in the article and avoid an "orphan" tag. For example, given an article about film "XYZ" you could find a sentence and wikify it thusly: "Acme productions received over $1 million in movie production incentives from the state of Wyoming". Note the blue term directs to your page. Just one way to make sure that plenty of pages lead to your page. You could even search news websites for mention that a given film received incentives, and then go add a sentence about it (with link to your article) into that movie's article. I just reckoned your professor might give you extra points if the "What links here?" button shows plenty of roads leading to your page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Beta Sigma

just wanted some comments on how to improve still working on it

Crazymon48 (talk) 02:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, first off your article is just a copy-paste from a Beta Sigma website, which violated Wikipedia's copyright policy. You can't post information belonging to other people. Secondly, even if the material had not been copied, the article also does not document "Notability", that is it gives no evidence that neutral, third-party reputable sources have written about your organisation. You can read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for the full breakdown. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Qantasplanes/Aircrash Confidential

I've made an article about television show called Aircrash Confidential. It has 3 references and it's good.

Qantasplanes (talk) 10:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Sundvl11/Eric Anthony Gondek

Looking for feedback on article and wish to submit as a Wikipedia article...

Sundvl11 (talk) 10:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Ehsanjahani/Ehsan Jahani

i can not publish my article .i can search and find it .but nmot easily .i want a;; the user just by writing -ehsan jahani- find my article i can also provide you with sources

EHSAN JAHANI 11:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

 Not done Greetings, you have several major issues to address before the page is ready for publication:

• Your username is the same as your subject; are you writing your own autobiography? That is generally a very bad idea for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that, if you are worth writing about, someone other than yourself (or friend of family) would step up and write it. The article Barack Obama was not written by Obama himself, it was written by other people because other people saw his as being worth writing about. Please do yourself a favour and read Wikipedia:Autobiography for why all this is an issue of great concern.
• You are not observing even the basics of Wikipedia formatting; your article was entitled "Biography of Ehsan Jahani". Note that no other article is entitle "Biography of..." And within the article there is little attempt to follow WP format, copyedit, or ensure that ideas are laid out in a clear and readable fashion.
• You have no reputable sources and no footnotes. Your links are lumped together at the bottom of the page, are not spelled out as citations, and several of them are to your own website. To meet WP:Notability (people) an article must have multiple footnotes to neutral, third party references.

So you see our concerns. Not trying to be mean, but starting your own WP autobiography is a very bad idea and not likely at all to end well. I suggest you try starting an article about a subject you are not personally related to, maybe check WP:Requested articles for an request for an architecture article on a topic you'd find interesting. I'd also strongly suggest you use Wikipedia:Article wizard when creating your first article, as you still have a ways to go before you're comfortaable with Wikipedia formatting. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:NehruR42/Article draft

This is my first attempt - I've been at it for 5 or 6 weeks - I would like to know if I'm on the right track and how I can improve. Thank you for your precious time to review my efforts so far.

NehruR42 12:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You're not too bad from a format perspective; honestly I'd just go ahead and add it to the stub. That said, you probably want expert help more than format help; have you dropped by the Discussion tab of WP:WikiProject Astronomy to get input from the community there? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Mangarah/x-fast trie

Hi, I wrote an article on x-fast tries, a data structure for storing integers from a bounded domain. I'd appreciate any feedback and a little help cleaning up the /to do subpage and moving the article into article space if it's ready. Thanks!

Mangarah (talk) 14:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You got a reply to your RfF two days back; did you read that? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

That was another user; Rf_insane, on a different, although closely related structure. I submitted a RfF four days ago, but didn't receive a reply yet. Mangarah (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Natriumchloratum/Contactless Atmospheric Pressure Ionization

This is my first contribution to Wikipedia. How to improve my article?

Natriumchloratum (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Vleit/Jürgen Ehlers

Please could I ask that this article, if satisfactory, is put on-line?

Here is the permission for reproduction of the image: From: Ehlers, Jürgen Dr. <Juergen.Ehlers@bsu.hamburg.de> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:09:04 +0000 Subject: Einverständniserklärung

Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber)

Ich erkläre in Bezug auf das Bild "Ehlers_2010-10-18.jpg", dass ich a) dessen Fotograf/in bin oder b) Inhaber/in des vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechts oder c) die Inhaberin / den Inhaber eines vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechtes rechtmäßig vertrete.

Ich erlaube hiermit jedermann die Weiternutzung des Bildes unter der freien Lizenz "Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 3.0 Deutschland" (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/legalcode).

Mir ist bekannt, dass damit in urheberrechtlicher Hinsicht Dritte das Recht haben, das Bild (auch gewerblich) zu nutzen und zu verändern, sofern sie die Lizenzbedingungen wahren. Mir ist bekannt, dass ich diese Einwilligung üblicherweise nicht widerrufen kann.

Mir ist bekannt, dass sich die Unterstellung unter eine freie Lizenz nur auf das Urheberrecht bezieht und es mir daher unbenommen ist, aufgrund anderer Gesetze (Persönlichkeitsrecht, Markenrecht usw.) gegen Dritte vorzugehen, die das Bild im Rahmen der freien Lizenz rechtmäßig, auf Grund der anderen Gesetze aber unrechtmäßig nutzen.

Gleichwohl besteht kein Anspruch darauf, dass das Bild dauerhaft auf der Wikipedia eingestellt wird.

13.4.2011, Jürgen Ehlers.

Vleit (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Several things: there's no point posting a photo permission email here, since we aren't the image licensing people. Click on your image, on the deletion warning tag it explicitly explains who to send photo permissions to. The article overall looks good except for the fact that you haven't fixed the "bare URLs" as mentioned in the tag at the top of your page. All your footnotes are just "http://www..." rather than proper citations. Further, one footnote is to German Wikipedia; you can't cite WP on WP as that's circular. Also, categories are for what is notable about a person; he's primarily known for being a crime writer, yes? Then you should add categories for that aspect of his career. So, a few things to tweak, and carefully note the exact details in your image deletion warning (which you can see by clicking the image on the page) for how to prove copyright status. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Tracks (novel)

This is my first article, created for a library science class. My biggest problem was simply moving the article out of my sandbox, since a page with this name had already existed as a redirect. Please see my comments on the article's discussion page for details. Hopefully my content is okay, though. Feedback is appreciated - thanks!

Kalorton (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Huh, I went in to this totally expecting to see no footnotes and having to explain WP:Notability (books) to the creator, but you have extensive footnoting of analysis and critical receptions from actual academic journals and whatnot, so you appear to be doing quite well. I'm not a books expert, so feel free to check into WP:WikiProject Books for technical advice, but in terms of being a proper WP article you're looking good. Nice work, hope you get a good grade. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you have written an excellent plot section. I hope you consider making more contributions of this calibre, and do have a look over on WP:WikiProject Books. I also hope you get a good grade.--Whiteguru (talk) 04:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

If you want to plus up your grade, note that per Wikipedia:Fair_use#Images you can upload one low-res cover image to the article, though you do not hold the copyright, under Fair Use provisions. Uploading images is a little tricky until you get used to it, so feel free to post back here for help if need be. The main thing to do is follow the instructions carefully, and make sure you fill out the sourcing and pick the right copyright info from the drop-down menu. Fair Use images go on WP proper, not WikiCommons like for Creative Commons free images. To upload, just go to your article and hit the "Upload" button on the left margin, fill out the form, and then copy the uploaded image title between brackets in your article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Vzafrin/Mark_Kriegsman

This is the first Wikipedia page I have written from scratch, so I'd love some outside verification that I'm not breaking any rules here. It's well documented, and as far as I can tell does not violate copyright. I do quote a newspaper article that is fully cited but unavailable on the internet; the amount I quote (a few sentences) falls comfortably into the fair use category. Some of the sources are NOT independent, and are provided for completeness' sake (I can take them down). Enough are independent that I believe the notability rule is satisfied.

Vzafrin (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You seem to have come out pretty well; nice work on sourcing. The main thing you need to do is add bulleting (done by typing an asterisk at the start) for the areas where you list things: patents, links, etc. Just put a bullet before each entry, and it'll look a little smoother. That aside, looks ready to publish. You can also try contacting the subject and see if he'll release a photo under Creative Commons, which would allow it to be used on WP: Check out WP:Image use policy for info of how to document permission in the image file metadata. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Siztrust/Peter Barnes (lighting designer)

I think I've followed all the wiki rules but never 100% sure so I'd just like some feedback so that I can remove the block at the top that says New Unreviewed Article please.

Siztrust (talk) 22:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, I've "userified" your article since it's not quite ready for the mainspace. A few things:

• On the very simple level, note WP articles incorporate the subject title into the first sentence; whereas you here give the subject, and then say it again and start the sentence. Easy fix.
• You don't have any categories; see WP:Categories for info, and remember that cats must be as specific as possible, so not "Light" but "English lighting designers" or whatever. Make sure you use existing categories so your links actually work.
• You don't yet demonstrate notability per WP:Notability (people). Most of your "references" are just mentions of him in a list of names; notability requires substantive discussion. The interview with Live 8 might do it, but the rest are all just passing mentions, it appears. Can you find any more extensive coverage, Guardian article about lighting that devotes a few sentences to him, etc?
• Once you add references, you need to add footnotes (WP:Footnotes) to indicate which specific facts in the article are sourced to which reputable sources.
• Right now your lists are just too long; an article is not a comprehensive list, so try to trim down his credentials to a score or less of the most historically/culturally/technically significant achievements.

Hope this helps, you can post back here once you get these things sorted out to request a move from your drafting Userspace to the article space. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)