Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 December 30
|< December 29||<< Nov | December | Jan >>||December 31 >|
|Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives|
|The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.|
- Has it received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of that website, such as news reports? The draft doesn't show any - Baike Baidu is ultimately user-submitted content and probably not reliable. Huon (talk) 12:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Panto!
Hi, I was wondering if my article would be okay to accept after reviewing so I can make them changes now instead of waiting again for a long time "Panto!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76jk (talk • contribs) 11:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- There's no need to wait with changes until the draft has been reviewed. For example, it would be helpful to use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which reference supports which of the article's statements. I'd also suggest shortening the plot section and instead adding something about the critical reception. Huon (talk) 12:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Johnathan Anthony Wallace
- Actually, the sources are not very good; Wikipedia does not consider Facebook and YouTube to be reliable sources for establishing a subject's notability. Does the subject meet any point of our notability guideline for musicians? If so, you need to find, and add, reliable third party sources -- like newspaper/magazine articles, interviews or other mainstream media coverage. Not blogs, user generated content or social networking sites. Pol430 talk to me 21:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James Anderton (RAF Officer) award of AFComitted frm list
How do I add James Anderton AFC to the alpabetic list under "A"? James Anderton was awarded the AFC in WW2. He was a Ft Lt in the RAF, 99 squadron. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nditon (talk • contribs) 23:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Presumably you are referring to this list? If so, you can't add people to it. It's a category that transcludes live Wikipedia articles. You would need to create an article for James Anderton. Something like Philip Babington. If his only claim to fame is being awarded the Air Force Cross then he may not be notable enough for his own article. You could add all the info you have got on him to this page and we can go from there. Pol430 talk to me 23:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Pol Wiki have a list of people awarded the AFC but it isn't complete therefore misleading and omits folks who deserve to be mentioned? James Anderton probaby wasn't as famous as Philip Babington but the list just isn't complete so why have a list at all? Nditon (talk) 23:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think we have a true list article for British Air Force Cross recipients. A category such as Category:Recipients of the Air Force Cross (United Kingdom) is meant to be a navigation help for the articles we have, not necessarily a complete list. Compare for example Category:1900 births which obviously doesn't include every person born in 1900. Huon (talk) 23:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- I have copied the draft from the template sandbox (your own sandbox is located at User:Nditon/sandbox) to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James Anderton (RAF Officer) award of AFComitted frm list, which is already in the preferred place for article drafts (though of course we'll have to simplify the article name when the draft is accepted). The old "submission declined" message (which should remain as a historical record until the draft is accepted) contains instructions for re-submission.
- I don't think the current sources are sufficient to establish Anderton's notability. The images provide no information whatsoever, not even his rank. Huon (talk) 12:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I have more information in my possession including his AFC, letter from King and pilots log book but I don't know how to reference docs in private ownership. How do I do this? I could scan them into a doc I suppose. Nditon (talk) 14:12, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Further to the above I have looked at the Teahouse and it says refs do not hav to be on line. I'm therefore wondering what more you want? See my query above about scanning in docs.Nditon (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedia requires published sources so our readers can look them up. Furthermore, the sources should be published with a reputable publisher in order to be considered reliable, and they should be independent of the subject. Books or print editions of newspapers would be OK because they can be found in libraries. The pilot's log book or a letter from King George would be primary sources, and if they're only in private ownership they aren't published - we cannot really expect all readers interested in those sources to travel to your physical location and to ask you to show them the letters. A scan probably wouldn't be considered reliable; given Photoshop, I could easily create fake "letter scans" that say whatever I want them to say. Huon (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. One of my sources was from a reliable publisher and the subject is mentioned initial so I don't quite understand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nditon (talk • contribs) 16:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC) Nditon (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi my reference about the book on 99 squadron is mentioned in Wkipedia and listed under the Bibliography on this site.
I have found another source in the London Gazette http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/41315/supplements/1124 Look under Flt Lts retaining their rankNditon (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- Edgerley's book on 99 Squadron is a reliable source, but how much does it have to say about Anderton? Does it, for example, confirm his motorcycle company? Does it say Anderton participated in two thousand bomber raids against Germany? (And by the way, are those two raids with 1,000 bombers each, or do we claim that Anderton personally flew 2,000 bombing missions? The latter sounds implausible.) The Gazette is also a reliable source but has very little to say about Anderton. To establish his notability we need significant coverage, and that's usually interpreted as "multiple sources of at least a paragraph on Anderton each". Huon (talk) 23:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi the link to Syl Anderton confirms motorcycle company which also has its own refs. He is mentioned in Egerleys book twice and in the index to it. You said earlier refs did not confirm rank or AFC so now London gazette does. Thousand bomber raids famous and of course he did not fly 2000 bombing missions. See Wikipedia bombing of cologne in ww2.Nditon (talk) 05:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
- The Syl Anderton article is badly sourced as well. None of its sources confirms James Anderton co-owned the motorcycle shop, and Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source (that would be circular). Huon (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Huon, you seem to put obstacles in the way of everything I do. This is a help page isn't it? Can you summarise what I need to do as so far, when you have raised a point I have dealt with it - and then you raise another.Nditon (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
- There are two related but distinct issues: Firstly, notability. A topic is considered notable enough for a Wikipedia article if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, where "significant coverage" is usually interpreted as "multiple sources devoting at least a paragraph each to the subject". The sources provided thus far, with the possible exception of Edgerley, barely mention Anderton: A few image captions without details and a list entry. If that's the best to be found, he may simply not be notable enough for an article.
- Secondly, verifiability. The article's content must be based on reliable sources. If the draft is to say that Anderton co-founded the motorcycle shop, we need a source that confirms the claim (and the parts list doesn't do that, especially as there was a third Anderton brother besides Sly and James). If the draft is to say that Anderton participated in thoudand-bomber raids, we need a source that says so (Does Edgerley do so? Can you provide a page number?). It would help to use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which source supports which of the draft's claims, though that's not strictly required. While I haven't looked up Edgerley (and cannot easily do so because my local library doesn't carry the book), I doubt a book on the entire squadron mentions all the details about Anderton that aren't related to his service with 99 Squadron.
- So even if we could find sources that clearly establish Anderton's notability, we might still need to remove claims that cannot be verified. Huon (talk) 21:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Basically you are not speaking plainly - are you saying I am wasting my time - please confirm? This is very disappointing because there is a lot of trivia on Wiki I assume you are very young and a US citizen and know nothing about the RAF or Thousand bomber raids or and AFC which is a pretty impressive medal in it's own right with nothing else mentioned. It is also pretty cynical to suggest I would alter stuff with Photoshop and I am offended. Nditon (talk) 22:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I have studied your comments on most of the articles on these help pages and I see you dont like to be challenged. I also see that you have commented on 3rd Jan on other articles so I assume you are now ignoring me. How do I get a differant reviewer? Nditon (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- First of all, I'm sorry for missing your reply yesterday - this thread is rather old, and I must have overlooked it while replying to the newest unanswered questions. I expect this thread will be archived automatically in a few days, so it may become necessary to start a new one anyway. That might also gather replies from other people.
- Secondly, I didn't review the draft, and if it were re-submitted for review, I'd probably not be the one to review it.
- Thirdly, unless better sources can be found I indeed believe that the article will not be accepted. I'm aware that other problematic articles exist, but that's no reason to create more - each submission must stand on its own merits.
- Fourthly, I did not mean to suggest that you would fake scans - but I doubt scans of privately held documents are considered reliable published sources. If you prefer to gather another opinion on the appropriateness of the scans, you can ask at the Reliable sources noticeboard - if you do so, please be as explicit as possible regarding the details of the source and what you want to use it for.
- Finally, my age and geographical location are irrelevant - I have provided links to the relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and they're the same whether I'm an American child or a wizened old master in a remote Asian monastery. Huon (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Dropping in on this, I might add that Huon is one of the most experienced contributors to the AfC helpdesk and he is simply trying to help you understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines as best he can. As it currently stands, your article won't be reviewed again until you submit it, but from a cursory look it doesn't look like there's significant coverage for him to stand out amongst the vast number of people who fought in the Second World War, as Wikipedia is not a memorial (otherwise you could argue every name written on the Menin Gate should have a Wikipedia article). It's also unfortunate that there's another James Anderton who appears to be far more notable, that makes it difficult to find online sources. You might want to look at researching sources in The National Archives, which has an extensive collection of documentation on military history and personnel. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC