Help desk
< October 29	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 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.

October 30[edit]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sobhi R. Mahmassani[edit]

Resolved

Hi. I am repeating my question in light of more recent development.

I initially created this article on Oct 12, and it was promptly rejected the same day for reasons that are now evident to me (lack of references, failure to establish notability, wrong format...). I submitted a revision on Oct. 13. I continued to improve the entry along the way, adding references and cleaning up. Normally, editing and saving the edits does not affect the initial date of resubmission, in terms of priority for review.

Unfortunately, my entry went from being in the "pending 15 days" category (submitted Oct 13) to "pending 1 day" (submitted Oct. 28), for no apparent reason. Perhaps someone else edited and changed the category inadvertently, but it does set us back by two weeks-- assuming that articles tend to get (re-)reviewed in the order received.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated so as to move the entry back to its proper queue/category. Many thanks.

(Masmahwik (talk) 03:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC))[reply]

With this edit you resubmitted the article. There was a 15 day old one at the top and a "right now" one at the bottom. In the following edit (press "next edit"), Rankersbo cleaned the submission. This removed the older submission template and replaced it with the newer one. It's actually a bug with the tool they used to clean it: See "Wikipedia talk:AFCH#Should older PENDING script be favored over newer one on CLEAN and related actions?". Hope this helps. -- ^t numbermaniac ^c 06:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In general you lose your place in the queue if you keep re-submitting your article if it is waiting for review, but I have put it back to where it was because it seems you didn't mean to submit again. Rankersbo (talk) 07:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to both of you numbermaniac and Rankersbo ! (Masmahwik (talk) 07:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC))[reply]

A solid article, but NPOV issues are preventing its acceptance at this time. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 22:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

please I need help how to rewrite my article

Silouan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silouan Vea (talk • contribs) 12:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that the person you are writing about is notable enough to require an article in Wikipedia. You could review the guidelines on notability for individuals at Wikipedia:NPERSON, and also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.

Have you looked at some Wikipedia Good Articles about people, to use as example? You can find Good Articles at Wikipedia:Good articles.

Please also be aware of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

Note - submission seems to be at User:Silouan Vea/sandbox. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forensic Oratory[edit]

I recently tried to add a page, "Forensic Oratory", but was put up for speedy deletion. Can someone tell me exactly what I did wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111bigjohnny (talk • contribs) 13:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Forensic Oratory was deleted by User:Yunshui as a test page. Because I am not an admin, I cannot see what was in it.

You now have draft article submissions at User:111bigjohnny/sandbox and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forensic Oratory.

Articles for creation has the advantage that submissions there don't get deleted as test pages (or for any other reason apart from blatant copyright violations or similar very problematic pages.) Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, at the time Forensic Oratory was deleted it was a page in the main encyclopedia that was empty of content. You created that empty page while Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forensic Oratory was waiting to be reviewed. The empty page was deleted for two reasons: one because it was an empty page in the main encyclopaedia, and two to make way for the page that was under review to be moved into that space if & when the article under review passes.

I'm sorry if this sounds strict and schoolteacherish, but what you are doing wrong is lacking patience- the first version had six yellow "Review waiting" boxes on it when I tidied it up. What you need to do now is wait for the page to be reviewed. You can improve the page if you want, but don't touch the technical lines at the top, or submit it again or you will lose your place in the queue. Rankersbo (talk) 06:38, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sandy Malone[edit]

Hi! I submitted an article titled "Sandy Malone" and it was declined. How can I find out why it was declined and what necessary changes need to be made in order for the article to be accepted?

Thank you for your time!

KelsiWelch (talk) 15:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)KelsiWelch[reply]

The reasons for it being declined, and the changes required, can be found at the top of the page itself; Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sandy Malone. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Draft biography of Sylvia Schwartz's by lisaby which was deleted by Jimfbleak because of a copyright violation[edit]

In March 2013, I worked on the biography draft.

At the time: - Sylvia Schwartz was expecting her baby and wasn't replying to my messages, - I felt I was flying blind, so I submitted the draft for review. - the draft was rejected for lack of notability.

I was busy with other things, so I put the draft aside, intending to come back to it in October.

In the mean time, Sylvia issued her CD Canciones Españolas. Having already reveiwed books on Amazon, I decided to submit a review of the CD. Not being a musicologist, I didn't have much to say about the CD other than that I liked it. To flesh out the review, I copied a good part of my draft Wikipedia biography of her into the text of my review. Two out of four readers rated my review favourably.

To deal with all possible complications up front, I did the same on Sylvia's fan page on Facebook.

Today, Jimfbleak deleted my draft, which represents hours of work (my first Wikipedia article), because of a copyright violation, viz. the identical text of part of my bio draft and the CD review.

Please, someone, help me. I want to work on Sylvia's bio today. What do I need to do to be able to continue?Lisaby 17:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisaby (talk • contribs) I just checked the list of active and inactive Wikipedia reviewers. I'm surprised not to find Jimfbleak, the deletor of my draft, on either list.Lisaby 18:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lisaby, Jimfbleak is simply the administrator who did the deletion, it may well have been tagged for speedy deletion as copyvio by someone else. I notice that the Amazon review is dated March 30, 2013 [1], but your draft must have existed since at least March 14, 2013, the date when your first submission was rejected. In fact, any administrator can still see your deleted draft as it was prior to March 30, 2013 and can compare it with the Amazon review to see which came first. Did you change the text substantially after that date to add material from your Amazon review? If not, you might have a case for undeletion as "backwards copyvio". It's quite an unusual situation. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Lisaby:, To further explain why Jimfbleak isn't listed as a reviewer. Most AfC reviwers aren't administators and don't have the ability to delete articles. What happens is that when the article is reviewed and a copyright violation is spotted, a note is left by the reviewer on your talk page, and a "tag" put on the article. While some administrators take an interest in AfC, it is likely that the one who comes along and deletes the article is not part of the AfC team. Rankersbo (talk) 08:58, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I intended to return to the draft in October and I did. When I returned, I found a ""pre-eviction" notice because I hadn't modified the draft for over 6 months. I replied saying that Sylvia Schwartz easily met the notability requirements, the absence of proof of which had been the reason for the draft's rejection. Sionk very kindly replied,saying that he had found some good references and encouraging me to add them and re-submit the draft. That's what I did yesterday. Accordingly, yesterday's version of the draft represents a further development with respect to the 30th March vesion of the draft.Lisaby 18:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

@Lisaby: While I empathise with your position, Wikipedia takes a strict stance on potential copyright violations. I would suggest you contact Jimfbleak at User talk:Jimfbleak in the first instance. If he cannot verify from the source that this is a case of reverse copyright violation it may be necessary for you to contact Wikipedia by email and attempt to verify yourself as the rightful copyright holder of the text in question. You can this by following the instructions at WP: DCM. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 22:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Lisaby: I've asked Jimfbleak on this talk page to take a look at this. If he is unable to do it soon, I'll try contacting another admin. For reference purposes, the deleted draft is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sylvia Schwartz. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Lisaby: I've verified that there appears not to be a copyright violation, and I can recreate the text and history. I made some comments on Voceditenore's talk indicating that there are still some problems that need to be addressed, and I've suggested recreating in your sandbox initially. I'll do that as soon as you or Voceditenore indicate that that's acceptable. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much Jim. Lisaby, I suggest for now that Jim restore the draft to your user space, perhaps User:Lisaby/Sylvia Schwartz. I can take a look at it (I can't see it now because I'm not an admin) and give some advice on how to bring up to acceptance standards, especially re encyclopedic style, neutral point of view, and referencing. Best Voceditenore (talk) 10:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Posted as suggested, note that there are no categories since it's not in article space and a bot would remove them if left in anyway. You will need to add appropriate cats when you move back to the article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:29, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

jharmarkin olubunmi[edit]

<draft removed> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gloryboy223 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. If you would like to start writing a new article, please use the Article wizard. If you have an idea for a new article, but would like to request that someone else write it, please see: Wikipedia:Requested articles. I hope this helps. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 22:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]