Help desk
< August 13	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 15 >

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.

August 14

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FunDrop

Hello, I just read that my article was declined. Can you tell me more about this decision?

Thank you, Tracey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.42.117.111 (talk) 00:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In short, this is an advertisement masquerading as an encyclopedia article. It cites no reliable third-party sources, sings the praises of FunDrop and even refers to the company as "we". Wikipdia is not free ad space. Huon (talk) 05:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here

Hi

I'm Sathish here and i'm a new user for wiki and i'm really not wondered or out curiosity to ask this question as i mentioned i'm a new user.

I have created a couple of articles (Biography) as mentioned by Wiki users, so please let me know the proper procedure for creating articles of this type as the person (about the person to whom i've created article) does'nt have any book kind of references or so kind of references.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sathishkumar.sundar (talk • contribs) 03:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no references for the subject of your proposed article, then we cannot accept an article on that subject. Reliable sources that might cover a living person are newspapers and reputable magazines; see also WP:Identifying reliable sources. I can't say much more without knowing who the person is or why they might be notable enough for an encyclopeide article. Huon (talk) 05:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nils Vesk

--Elvandesantos (talk) 04:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

please help me with my article, I really want it to work so I can add more pages to link some details too. More power to you guys!

No need to paste a copy of the article to this page; a link will do. I have copyedited the draft so the sources are properly displayed. There are quite a few issues here. First of all you may want to take a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest - writing about your boss is discouraged. The draft itself is unduly promotional ("the world's fastest-growing companies"? Says who? Vesk has "extensive training and qualifications"? Such as what, exactly, and which third-party source reports that?), and it cites not a single reliable source that is independent of Vesk. If these are the best sources to be found, then Vesk is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Huon (talk) 04:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PrithvirajKothari

Can I please know the reason for the deletion of the page "Articles_for_creation/Prithviraj_Kothari" Nicola frenandes (talk) 05:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prithviraj Kothari was deleted as a copyright violation - the content was directly copied from another site - this isn't only against Wikipedia's rules, it is also illegal. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:59, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation

Hello, I got a message saying that my content was similar to the material on the http://www.effectivecooperation.org/ website. I work for the organization that holds the copyright to this text and permit its use on Wikipedia.

Please let me know if I should do anything else to clear up this issue.

KirstyRossTaylor (talk) 06:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's copyrights are very specific, and slightly different to what is used in many other places. All content submitted to Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licence. Put very briefly, this means anything you write can be freely copied and even sold to others without restriction. Since this ability to resell information surprises newcomers, we need explicit authorised permission to reuse content if it is not already marked with the appropriate Commons licence. The formal way to do this is via the Volunteer Response Team, but a much easier way is simply to rewrite the article in your own words. You might also want to check your sources - the Justine Greening article is cited to a YouTube link, which are generally not considered acceptable sources. See if you can find more sources like the Guardian article, which is a good source to use. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nyi Nay MIn

Nyi Nay MIn web is on of the most popular Burmese knowledge site . he have over 2 thousands members . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.130.29 (talk) 09:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it's important, a reliable source will say so. You will need to reference several, otherwise your article will not be accepted. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Title of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joseph Theodoor Leerssen

Hi, I have just submitted an article on tne historian Joep Leerssen: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joseph Theodoor Leerssen. The article drafted by me has been provisionally given the title "Joseph_Theodoor_Leerssen". While these are his official names, they are rarely used. The usual form, "Joep Leerssen" is also the one used for the Dutch and Limburgs wikipedia entries. (Compare also "Bill Clinton" as opposed to "William Jefferson Clinton").

Upon acceptance (I hope...) one could always add make a redirect, of course,
and if I have enough user rights (?) I could also try to "move" the article

- but it would be neater to have the main article placed under the more common moniker right from the start. Is there any way the "Joseph Theodoor" in the (provisional) title can be changed to "Joep"? Sorry for the bother. And a bit premature, I guess Flingers (talk) 10:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Put a note about this at the top of the page, then the reviewer who ends up approving the article will know to move it to the right name. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nadim Karam

To Whom it May Concern,

We have been patiently awaiting your response to our recent submission of "Nadim Karam", which was submitted on July 27th, 2013. We understand that given the number of submissions each week that there may be occasional delays. However, if there is an issue with the submission, we would appreciate it if you would please inform us as soon as possible. Otherwise, we look forward to your reply and having our article enter the Wikipedia universe.

Best Regards, Martine Kiwan (talk) 12:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission was declined on 2 July 2013. It has not been submitted since then. To do so, you should click on the "Resubmit" button on the "Submission declined" box. However, you should read the comments below the decline boxes, as they will give you suggestions in improving your article. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias Good afternoon. i have submitted the above article several times, eachtime with new additions and changes. if you are to view history, you will realise that i have been making changes. what else should I add? what I'm I missing?Faintsmoke (talk) 13:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the sources you have added are just lists of the books he has written. What we need, however, is coverage in sources about him, not by him. If Matthias has been interviewed in the national press, use that. If he's had magazine articles covering him and his work, that might also be acceptable. Just writing a book and getting it published is not enough to be notable and make your submission pass. Everyone who declined the article can now have a trout slap for not explaining this to you! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:57, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joseph Barrett

This was my first submission on Joseph Barrett and it was declined. I don't know why to fix it and can't get in to see it. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Marisa Gillen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marisagillen (talk • contribs) 13:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article was declined because it did not cite any sources. Just writing about what you personally know isn't sufficient, because other people can't easily check that what you say is true! So we rely on people tagging facts against reliable sources, such as newspapers and booked. The links in the "Submission declined" box against your article have more information. Also, have a look at the Teahouse link on your user talk page, which can provider further help and training. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Popi Marden: Abstract Artist

Why did the article 'Popi Marden: Abstract Artist' get declined by Wikipedia? Please inform us of your recommendations on how to get a posting on this website. This will be a growing article, we would love the input to help it do so, please help this artist have a face on your site. Thank you for your efforts.

Popi is an innovator and has unique stylings unlike any other artist on the planet. He has been treading new grounds at every corner. Artists are unique individuals and he deserves a slot in history just as much as any thesbian.

I sincerly thank all of you Wikipedians for your efforts. J. Lamberte J. Lamberte (talk) 15:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As MatthewVanitas has said, you need to find reliable sources such as a newspapers or magazines with national coverage, and tone down on the promotional language. Just about every artist anywhere describes themselves as an "innovator" and have been "treading new grounds" - it doesn't actually mean anything. Notable artists don't need to do that - they just point to their feature in the Sunday Times Magazine, for instance. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Lerner Designs

Hi There,

I was told by the live chat to come here to address one denied source that I used in my article that was not published. This source cites a lot of the information I have in the article, but it was denied because it is blocked by a Pay-Wall. I was told that someone here would most likely have a log in (the source is WWD, Women's Wear Daily), and here is the link: http://www.wwd.com/business-news/mergers-acquisitions/jerry-leigh-acquires-david-lerner-6830226?src=search_links

I would love to know if this is a credible source that establishes notability about David Lerner Designs (the clothing collection). Let me know! Thank you EmmaBHenry (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I don't have access to WWD, but right now I can't tell what that source is cited for anyway - the one source heavily cited throughout the draft is a press release, not a reliable source. At a glance WWD seems reliable enough; the question is what it actually says about David Lerner Designs. Also, a single good source is not enough to establish that the company is notable. Huon (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Aletheiapresbytatos/sandbox

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Fredd Wayne Still compiling references and hope to have those more complete soon. Tangential concern: how do I change my unintentionally ostentatious user name? Understood on creating acct that this would be simple but haven't figured it out.. at all... short of voiding this account and starting over. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aletheiapresbytatos (talk • contribs) 21:31, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Aletheiapresbytatos, please see Wikipedia:Change username. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/World T.E.A.M. Sports

My article was rejected. I followed all rules for posting the article and included numerous references. Yet, MatthewVanitas rejected it, stating:

The vast majority of your footnotes are to the organisation itself. Wikipedia doesn't let orgs speak for themself, or let people promote little-known topics, we instead require that you demonstrate a body of media or academic coverage of a topic. The point of an encyclopedia is to compile neutral published knowledge, not just give the subject its own voice, and not to share unpublished personal knowledge.

Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

I don't see this with other entries in Wikipedia, which commonly includes completely incorrect language. I also have added content to postings with no references.

How do I proceed? There is no one to contact, not even MatthewVanitas.

Aragoniterick (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aragoniterick, welcome to Wikipedia. See, an organization's own web site is not a good source for an article , because the organization is almost certainly trying to make themselves look good. What's needed is independent, reliable sources such as newspaper or magazine articles. Also, any article that seems to not meet those guidelines should either be improved with reliable references, or deleted. Just because other articles don't meet the guidelines doesn't mean that yours can ignore them. Howicus (talk) 23:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also replied to requestor on my Talk page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tango Café

I greatly appreciate the comments of User:SefBau on the creation of the Tango Café page. Not sure if this is the correct place to address the concerns. If not, I apologize and please enlighten me.

There were two criticisms: one that the piece "read like a biography" of the owner. Three sentences out of nine mentioned her name. I have eliminated the last two references. (As a newbie with wikipedia, I don't really see the references as excessive, but so be it. )

The other issue was the use of videos as references. There were six articles referenced from newspapers. There were seven references to "The Tango Cafe Legacy" video series, of which five were interviews or discussions. Their purpose was to document the Tango Café's role in Pittsburgh as a cultural center in multiple dimensions. To me, again as a new contributor, these seem more "verifiable" than many printed and broadcast sources. They don't qualify as "self-published", in the sense that the author/videographer of the series, Victor Beltrán, was not a subject or a participant. (I did fail to include the author's name.) In any case, they may be republished the Latin American Cultural Union or the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce; I don't know if that makes them more suitable as references or not.

The remaining references document music performances and art shows at the Café; I can see the problem with including them in the reference section. I wonder whether some of these are suitable for inclusion via an "External Links" section or side-bar?

I greatly appreciate the chance to contribute to wikipedia; with time I will master the authoring skills. Thanks to all! Notsofeo (talk) 23:46, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the references is that YouTube is not a reliable source. There is no editorial oversight whatsoever. I could produce videos of a local cafe and upload them to YouTube; that's not an indication that the cafe is notable. Also, when Victor Beltrán, the author, is also the publisher, then that's a self-published source. I don't think the videos being republished by advocacy organizations will help.

The newspapers are all routine coverage in the local news; there's no indication that anybody outside Pittsburgh has ever written about the cafe. That's not really an indication of notability.

Regarding the mentions of the founder: If the Spanish lessons were part of the cafe operation, that may well belong in the article; it read as if they were a side job by the owner, not a part of the cafe. What the owner did after the cafe closed doesn't really tell us anything about the cafe, and you were right to remove that. Huon (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]