Help desk
< January 18	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 20 >

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.

January 19

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Panabo City

Panabo City (Cebuano: Dakbayan sa Panabo, Filipino: Lungsod ng Panabo) is a 1st class city nearDavao City in the province of Davao del Norte, Philippines. The city has an area of 249 square kilometers. According to the 2010 LGPMS Census, it has a population of 164,035 people in 32,807 households. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheR-ManRey (talk • contribs) 05:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So says the draft, which currently is not submitted for review. Is the census available online? Could you add a link to the daft that confirms those numbers? Is the city discussed in other sources besides the census, maybe in history books or travel guides? Huon (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Getting rejected by Bonkers the Clown???

Ariana Dubynin is a legitimate actress, who has been in numerous things, like films, and Criminal minds, just google her, and you will see....anyway, I tried to make a wikipedia page for her, and it got rejected by a person named bonkers the clown. WTF? here is Ariana's imdb page, it's a true post! www.imdb.com/name/nm1907068/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skittles LaCoste (talk • contribs) 09:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Its Bonkers, and yeah, she's not notable by our standards, and please refrain from vandalizing articles to vent your frustration (though nobody quite cares). And oh, welcome to Wikipedia and MERRY EDITING! Peace. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mel Smilow

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mel_Smilow

I would like to know what the status of this article is. It was declined on 12/25 by Puffin. It was resubmitted on 19 January 2013, with edits suggested by Puffin (eg., no peacock terms and more citations).

I would like to add photos, which had been in the original submission. Has it been accepted? I went on the chat function and the person who looked at the article thought it would be fine.

Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noosphere21 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The draft hadn't been resubmitted since Puffin's review; I have resubmitted it for you now.

I checked the draft's history and found no indication that it ever had photos. Whether photos are suitable depends on their copyright status; free images can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. We might use non-free images under "fair use", but Wikipedia's policy on non-free content requires such images to be used only in accepted articles, not in drafts - we'd have to wait until the draft has passed review. See WP:NFC for more details on non-free content. Once the images are uploaded, the picture tutorial explains how to add them to the draft.

I'm a little skeptical about the references. Firstly, it would be a great help if you could use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which references support which of the draft's statements; see also WP:Referencing for beginners for more help on adding references. Secondly, those I checked weren't all that helpful. The furniture ad on sale at Ebay does not mention Smilow himself; I don't see how it supports the article at all. One of the New York Times pieces is a paid ad, not a news report, and thus at best a primary source (presumably paid by his relatives), the other doesn't mention Smilow at all. The Counterpunch does mention Smilow, but only in a very short account that provides few details. Those were the sources I could easily check; unless the others are much better, I don't think they serve to verify much of the draft's content. Huon (talk) 19:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Article on Reginald Kevin Gee, Contemporary American NeoExpressionist Artist

Please advise as to the process for getting this article expeditiously reviewed by someone familiar with art and/or the neoexpressionism movement. The article is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Reginald Kevin Gee (Reg K Gee). I am the artist's representative and I've tried to upload images, which I've received permission from the artist to use in this article. Thanks for your help.

Victor Edgar Rivera Writer/Poet/Art Dealer

VictorEdgar (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted the draft for review, but there's no guarantee the reviewer will be an art expert. Since Wikipedia articles should be written for a general audience, such expertise is not necessary to review articles. For example I don't need to be familiar with art to note that the "Early life" and "Artictic style" sections don't cite any sources - but Wikipedia content should be based on reliable, independent sources. I also don't need to be an expert to find that the book given as a source for the use of Gee's painting in the traveling MLK exhibition doesn't mention Gee by name.

You may also want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing on topics you're closely affiliated with is discouraged because it's difficult to maintain a neutral point of view.

The images seem to have been deleted on copyright grounds. Permission to use images in one article is not enough; Wikipedia requires images to be freely licensed, for example under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License which allows anybody to re-use the image for any purpose. If the artist is willing to release the images under such a license, see WP:Requesting copyright permission for details. Wikipedia also accepts non-free content under some specific conditions, one of which is that it be used in an article proper - a draft is not enough. Huon (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inserting logos to articles

Hello,

Can you please advise how to add a logo to the Wikipedia page?

Thanks Tamara — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamaraking17 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is: Not yet. Logos are copyrighted, and unless they're released under a free license such as the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License Wikipedia's policy on non-free content states we may use such images under the doctrine of "fair use" - but only in full-blown articles, not in drafts. Once the draft has been accepted, the image can be uploaded via the File Upload Wizard.

On an unrelated note, your draft currently does not cite any sources. Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as news coverage. A topic must have received significant coverage in such sources to be considered notable enough for an article. Huon (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]