Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 May 7

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

Help moving an article[edit]

This page: has gotten helpful feedback over the last few days, but I don't have move privileges yet. It was suggested that I post here and that someone else would be able to help move it? Thanks for any guidance.

Jean1980 (talk) 03:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

  •  Done done, and WikiProjects added to the Talk page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

User:AdamRygiol/Frederick Marx need a review - my first attempt[edit]

Looking for a basic review from someone who knows what they're talking about. Do you think this page would pass? Thanks!

AdamRygiol (talk) 04:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Here's a few helpful comments. I have also welcomed you at your talk page, with links to numerous policies that will help you with your editing.
  1. More reliable sources are necessary. You seem to have a few less than you need, and Wikipedia is not a reliable source on its own, and IMDB is not a reliable source for proving notability.
  2. Don't forget to categorize your article.
  3. There are a high number of red links. Perhaps some should be set as regular text.
I hope that helps. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Eugenia Kim (author)[edit]

Is this page ready for prime time? Eugenia Kim (author) If so, how does it get there? Anything else I need to do? Thanks

44Columbia (talk) 06:19, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

MiG-37 Ferret[edit]

Is this article enough to be included in Wikipedia? (talk) 06:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

According to this, that is a fictional aircraft... the resources you have linked to are also not up to the standards for sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Please make sure you log in when posting on Talk pages so people can contact you if needed; you're showing up now as an anonymous IP (note your signature
In any case, the layout is pretty decent; I made a few tweaks there. Your category is way too broad; look up an article on a similar airframe to get an idea for how specific cats should be. None of your footnotes except maybe the .ru one are WP:Reliable sources. Blogs, fansites, forums, and basically any medium with no quality control where anybody can post anything do not qualify as reliable sources. What you want are books, official government sites, news media coverage, etc. Have you checked on GoogleBooks for info you can cite? Note you can automatically generate GoogleBooks footnotes using . Sourcing should be your top priority at this point. Oh, and the article is already "on Wikipedia"; it's in articlespace, not on your drafting userpage. MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:47, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Article has been deleted for copyright violations. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

John Paul II Foundation Middle East[edit]

Johnpaul2 foundation (talk) 09:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Maxim Ludwig & The Santa Fe Seven[edit]

Need to have reviewed to see if meets standards. (talk) 23:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Grace Tacherra/Margaret Lazarus[edit]

This is a newly created article and I am particularly looking for help regarding the references and general formatting. Thank you! Are all of my links and references properly done? Is the general formatting of the page adequate?

Grace Tacherra (talk) 01:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, the formatting isn't bad, though you lack WP:Categories. The main issue is your sourcing: you don't footnote WP articles to other WP articles; either discuss rape culture as pertains to Lazarus in the body of the article and wikilink it, or remove it. That aside, you only have one footnote to the Cambridge work; can you find other books or news articles that substantiate specific claims in the text? It is importnat that a reader be able to tell where a given piece of info came from, otherwise it's simply unsubstantiated. "Margaret Lazarus" gets quite a few hits at GoogleBooks; you don't want to cite her own works, but others' coverage about her importance. If you find a given section of a book that helps verify the credibility of your article, you can take the GoogleBooks URL in your address and drop it directly into and it will automoatically produce a perfect footnote for you. So, main issue is adding references, but you should have no problem finding such info online. Ideally, everything you state in the article should be traceable back to some authoritative source of information in order to firmly base the article's credibility on WP:Reliable sources. Feel free to post back here with any questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:40, 9 May 2011 (UTC)