Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 January 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Back to main feedback page
Index of all pages[edit]

Please help make this article better.

Emeraldemperor (talk) 03:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the main issue is with the references; it seems to rely on just one site mainly. According to WP:CITE sites like YouTube cannot be used as references as they are not considered notable, so please remove those references. The article is mostly based on information that isn't officially announced yet or sourced by reliable references, or at least it seems to me, because it's a forthcoming album. Chevymontecarlo 19:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Anandkanatt/Dr. P. E. Abraham[edit]

Please review my article about a doctor, lot of people might be interested about him.

Anandkanatt (talk) 08:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

You need reliable sources to your article; otherwise it is likely to just get deleted for lack of notability or lack of references. Chevymontecarlo 19:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
And it's not worth saving. I'll put it up for AfD. -Cntras (talk) 12:46, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I am having trouble with the references tag. My sources are listed in the appropriate area but I'm having difficulty citing individual pieces of information to a specific reference. Please advise!

Emmelovely (talk) 09:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The idea with the inline citations that you're using to display your references is that you're supposed to place a reference using the <ref> </ref> tags next to the statement that you want to verify with a reference, then in the 'References' section you place a {{reflist}} tag so all the references with <ref> </ref> tags display there in a neat list. Hope you understand; I can help by making the changes myself if you wish. Good luck! Chevymontecarlo 19:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
As to the actual article I think there are some tone and Point of View problems; the article kinda sounds like an advertisement in places. Please consider making improvements to the article's neutrality. Chevymontecarlo 19:10, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

Hello All, I worked on this for a bit and requested feedback a few times but got none so set it live, hopefully its good enough, please give me some feedback!

Ben W Brown 10:28, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

A few suggestions:
  • You might want to add an infobox to the article.
  • For your book/printed reference, you might want to use a {{cite book}} template just to display it 'properly' or in the preferred way.
  • Consider perhaps adding more links, but I think that is a more formatting/layout suggestion rather than something that is actually wrong with the article. Chevymontecarlo 19:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

URL needs changing but that's fine, it can be changed to whatever

TheSunPaper (talk) 14:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

When you move the article to the 'main space' or make it go live using the 'Move' function (the move tab at the top of the article) you can choose the name of your article then. As to the article itself, I think it's fine; there doesn't seem to be any issues other than perhaps the reliability/number of reliable references but I don't think it's much of an issue. Chevymontecarlo 19:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

All feedback on the concept of the Hollow corporation welcome.

Fionastevens87 (talk) 14:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It seems the article has been tagged for deletion since; I recommend that you work on resolving the issues the article was tagged for rather than making changes based on my suggestions. Good luck. Chevymontecarlo 19:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

Hello, this is my first article. I followed the tutorial as well as other similar article templates.

I hope all is correct.

David Mapp (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a good start but I do think you perhaps need more reliable, third-party references from independent sources, as most of the references you have at the moment are from the company's own site. If you cannot find any third-party references or find very few, it is usually a sign that the article's subject has notability problems. Chevymontecarlo 19:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

One of my images won't display, and I can't figure out why. Aside from that, I think the page is pretty much good to go, but it's the first article I've created so it would be nice to have feedback before I request to have it moved to the mainspace. Thanks!

KathyB111 (talk) 18:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the image issue is to do with either you haven't uploaded it properly at Wikimedia Commons, or the link you're using is incorrect. Either way I think it's best placed for the help desk. Other than that I think it could be classed as a stub, but it is nicely informative and well written. Chevymontecarlo 19:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

User: Crawford123/Marcus H. Crawford[edit]

Could someone please review my reference page to see if it is correct or if needs further editing as well as the the way the external link is presented? Thank you.

Crawford123 (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Marcus H. Crawford: Self promotion, no significant write up in independant reliable sources. I've flagged it for speedy deletion as unambiguous promotion. Astronaut (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I think I have the sourcing that I need for this article. I'm just unsure as how to format the cites consistently. (talk) 20:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Not so bad, but please don't illustrate the article with copyrighted images (even if you upload them falsly claiming them as your own). Astronaut (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

Could someone please review my page. I wrote a groundbreaking book on my Krupp Dynasty relatives of Essen, Germany. They were given the title of "First Family of the Third Reich" by Adolf Hitler. I discovered that the true identity of my great-grandmother was Engelbertha Krupp, who was banished and disinherited from her family for marrying a poor, Catholic shoemaker named John Stroebele.

Thank you!


Dstrob (talk) 21:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think this article will pass WP:N. I don't see that this woman has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources, as required. Your book is self-published through, which is a "vanity" publisher, so it cannot be a reliable source underlying the article. (Book sources should be published by a mainstream or academic publisher - see WP:RS.) It's not clear to me that the other two sources cited contain significant coverage of Engelbertha, at least based on their titles. The use of inline citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) would improve the article, assuming she satisfies WP:N - then other editors can see the reliable coverage of her. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

Just wanted to make sure this article is OK by wikipedia standards. Thanks for any help.

Jevansafb (talk) 21:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I'd love any comments or suggestions from veteran Wikipedia users. How does the article look so far? Any tips going forward to ensure publication? Thanks!!

Chicago2011 (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I would like to contribute this article about the relatively new sociological concept of place-work. I would appreciate any guidance or criticism to get this up on-line. Thank you!

Akeeler1322 (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I've done some basic formatting of the article (properly formatting bulleted lists, adding a few "wikilinks"), but I'm not sure this concept is yet "notable", which is a requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia. (See WP:N.) By your own admission, it's a very new concept. Has anyone else elaborated on this besides Hochschild Jr.? (It appears that the other examples don't use this concept, but were instead just chosen by Hochschild as examples illustrating a theoretical framework he created later.) If not, it is probably not eligible for inclusion in Wikipedia. Judging by a google scholar search[1], it doesn't look like Hochschild's article has been cited by anyone, so it doesn't look like this concept is taking off. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I would just like people to read over the article and let me know about any typos or issues they have with it before I submit it.

It's on a rare species of lizard found in the Amazon Rainforest.


Questathon50 (talk) 23:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

See above - question double-posted at # Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[edit]

I wrote a Wikipedia article about the Modern Language Journal published by Wiley-Blackwell. I would appreciate it if a wikipedia editor could review my article and see if there's anything that needs to be done before my article can be officially published on Wikipedia.


MLJ2011 (talk) 23:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It's already "officially published" on Wikipedia! It looks like a good start. I'd recommend having a look over Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Writing guide for more guidance about how to further develop your article - it's a very good guide written by editors interested in improving articles on academic journals generally. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Untitled Hebrews 8 refers also to the "New Covenant.[edit]

Your article on Heb 8 says there is only one reference to the New Covenant. Please find another on Heb 8.

Vangasan (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what article you're referring to. We have Epistle to the Hebrews, but no article specifically on Hebrews 8. In any event, it would be best to place this question on the talk page of the article in question, where interested editors can review your feedback and make appropriate changes. Or be bold and edit the article yourself! Happy editing, Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)