Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 November 25
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 24 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 26 > |
| 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. |
November 25
[edit]Hello,
I am just trying to understand how to make my article adequately convey notability of the subject.
From my perspective I feel I have included many independant and reliable sources. I have included competition information from independant judo sites, articles from sports organisations, photo's from judo competitions (including world championships), and a reference approved by the hungarian judo association.
I have had a look at the wikipedia pages of other Judoka that have been deemed notable enough to have a page created, and it seems that these pages are much less detailed than what I have provided. I can provide examples if you like, but would mainly like advice as to how I need to edit this page to make it worthy of approval.
Regards,
Demented broomstick
Demented broomstick (talk) 00:38, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Can someone review my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainWizard29422 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- It's waiting to be reviewed, so it will be reviewed when someone gets to it. There are more than 1,500 other submissions also waiting. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, while I'm here, some advice. Remove all the clubs and societies and such, and do not use Wikipedia as a source. Look for local newspaper mentions (no matter how trivial) as sources instead. See also WP:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES (the latter means your work might all be wasted?) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:54, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Can you please advise how this article might be worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia? Thank you.
Mike.e.swope (talk) 04:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- As the reviewer noted, the references you've used aren't independent of the subject. The majority of them are from Totally Tae Kwon Do, and the ones that aren't are about the contributors to the magazine, not the magazine itself. In order to establish notability, you need references that are specifically about the magazine and unrelated to Totally Tae Kwon Do. If you can find references from reliable independent sources which provide extensive coverage of the magazine, please resubmit your article and it'll be re-reviewed. Julie JSFarman (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Review of User:Hobamf/sandbox
[edit]Hi, i would like to know what went wrong with the article that it got rejected for submission thanks!
Hobamf (talk) 04:56, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, the article has no independent, reliable sources to it. Articles need sources to show the companies in them are notable Rankersbo (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Why was my page declined?
[edit]Good morning
I was wondering if you could let me know why my submission was declined? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cordialoustewart/sandbox) I'd like to know so I can make the relevant changes.
Thank you, Louise — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.11.198.1 (talk) 08:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- It was declined for the reason given in the pink box at the top of that page; This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. You could take a look at Wikipedia:VRS to see what sort of sources are needed and why. In addition, the submission appears to be a minimally re-written version of what is on Cordia's own website. This is problematic because that text is not licensed for use on Wikipedia, and is also far too promotional to serve as an encyclopedia article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear DES (David E. Siegel), Thank you kindly for your comments and help with the "Articles for creation/Paul Stallan" I am writing about Scottish architect Paul Stallan. You make some suggestions Can you clarify if I should make these amendments and resubmit for you to review or will you make these amendments? Kind regards Stallan-Brand (talk) 13:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, please make these changes if you wish your article to be re-reviewed. --nonsense ferret 23:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NoORM
[edit]Is this the help desk? No idea, why it requires a formatted input |:
No idea, what was wrong with my article.
I love Wikipedia, but writing an article is cumbersome ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by UPietruschka (talk • contribs) 13:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- The basic issue here is that wikipedia exists as an encyclopedia to provide coverage of notable and significant subjects. Your article did not demonstrate, by reference to examples of significant independent coverage about the software in reliable sources, that the software was sufficiently notable. You may wish to have a look at Wikipedia:Notability_(software) for some general discussion about writing articles on software. --nonsense ferret 23:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I wrote this article yesterday, which is in queue for approval. A friend told me that I could have submitted it for creation directly because I'm signed in. I did it the approval way because this is the first full article I've created with this account, but I'm now thinking maybe I should have submitted it directly, because Joshua Greene is getting a lot of press attention in the last month due to his book coming out, and there's some chance another person will try to write a similar article without finding mine first. Do you have suggestions on this? Thanks! Brian Tomasik 13:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Tomasik (talk • contribs)
- A few things struck me about your article. Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems to be generally intended as an 'academic' book - and as such I would expect to see reviews from well established academic journals and things of that nature. Kirkus reviews are I believe something that you pay for and seems like an odd choice in this case. Plus academic theories/books tend to have as much criticism as there are positive reviews and this should be reflected in articles about them which should be balanced and not overly promotional. My comments aren't intended to be in the nature of a review, just a quick suggestion I thought of while looking at your query here. In answer to your question I would recommend you go through the review process as this will mean if and when your article is accepted and published it has a much lower chance of being deleted. --nonsense ferret 23:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the comments. I guess I'll wait for the review process and take the risk of someone duplicating the effort of writing another article in the meanwhile unless you can think of a better solution. Greene's Moral Tribes book is a combination of academic and popular writing. I think it is meant for a mass audience. Brian Tomasik 00:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Tomasik (talk • contribs)
Please give me some advises!
Huangyh3764 (talk) 13:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
UnresolvedI'm writing an article on a musical artist called SORNE. I meant to have my article be called "SORNE" but it is called "Morgan Sorne". I suppose this happened because the first appearance of a name in bold was "Morgan Sorne".
I began it: Morgan Sorne, known as SORNE ...
I've already submitted the article for review. Can I still change the title? If so how? I tried sentences around so that "SORNE" appeared first but it didn't change the article's name.
Thank you. DEL1025 (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Subbmited to articles for creation "Elsa Cladera de Bravo"
Hi, I do not understand why my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index,php?title=User:Nadezhda_Bravo_Cladera&action=edit, that one can read in page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nadezhda_Bravo_Cladera, does not correspond with https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Elsa_Cladera_Encinas_de_Bravo? This one is not the last edit that I have saved. Nadezhda Bravo Cladera (talk) 20:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Simply put, they are two separate pages. Edits you make to one of the pages will not automatically be reflected in the other. It would be best if you only make changes to Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Elsa_Cladera_Encinas_de_Bravo as this is the one to be reviewed. If you need help transferring changes you have made from one page to the other, feel free to ask here. --nonsense ferret 23:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)