Help desk
< March 7	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 9 >

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.

March 8

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Samuel Snowden

Whenever I save or preview the page I am creating, I lose all of the information I have typed in except for the introduction of the article. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Samuel Snowden

Mdaley55 (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)Mark D[reply]

The issue was a broken <ref> tag: If you want to refer to a certain named reference again, the correct code is <ref name="RefName" />; if you omit the "/", that will be interpreted as the beginning of a new footnote, and everything afterwards as content of that footnote. Huon (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re-submitting an edited article

I edited an article and tried to re-submit, but I have no indication that it has been submitted. Please advise. "Waldo Family Lecture Series on International Relations" — Preceding unsigned comment added by News 2222 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have not currently resubmitted this article. Click on the link next to the text that says "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." You will know when it has been submitted because a yellow "submission waiting for review" box will appear. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James B. Norman

there is an indication on an article for James B. Norman that it sounds like "advertising" - how should i correct that page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caseydeak (talk • contribs) 19:13, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That article has worse problems than its tone - it does not show Norman has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as news coverage or articles about Norman (not by Norman) in reputable journals on history or photography. We need such coverage to establish that Norman is notable enough for a Wikipedia article.

That said, the draft's tone does seem unduly and one-sidedly positive; for example, which source says that the objects Norman photographed were the state's "most significant historic resources"? The book descriptions read like sales blurbs, and we shouldn't use adjectives like "amazing" without attribution to the source - they're obviously just opinion, not statements of fact. In this case it doesn't even refer to Norman or his work, so it's irrelevant opinion anyway. Huon (talk) 20:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]