Help desk
< September 19	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 21 >

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.

September 20

The Parmelia Race, Plymouth to Perth, 1979

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Parmelia race, Plymouth to Perth, 1979

I have been travelling quite a bit with limited internet access for the past couple of months and now wish to resolve the issues with my submission.

I am afraid I have been very confused by my Wikipedia submission experieince to date and seek some "simple" help.

The Parmelia Race is already included in Wikipedia under the title, "Parmelia Yacht Race" and I have noted some errors in the article. Also there is some very significant data missing from the article. Considering this I thought it more expedient to write a complete, new article. On reflection it may have been better to just edit the existing article.

The main errors in the existing article are: 28 yachts departed Plymouth in 1979 and a lone South African joined the fleet in Cape Town for Leg 2, whereas the existing article states 38 yachts left Plymouth, and The article claims the Parmelia Race was the longest yacht ever held at the time of the event. This is is incorrect as there were four "around-the-world" yacht races held prior to the Parmelia Race in the 1960s and 1970s, and these four races are all mentioned in Wikipedia articles.

In previous correspondence with Wikipedia I have mentioned I was the initial representative of the sponsor of the Parmelia Race, The Parmelia Hotel (before it joined the Hilton International chain) in 1976. Then I became the event's Executive Officer in 1979. Because of the errors I noted in "Parmelia Yacht Race" article I contacted Royal Perth Yacht Club ["RPYC"] and have been working with them to both organise their Parmelia Race archives and correct the existing Wikipedia article. And the RPYC archives concur with my submission and within those archives is a very large number of press clippings covering the race; sorting through to find the most relevent may take some time.

If your advice is to edit the existing story could someone please explain to me how to print off a copy of my latest submission; every time I have tried to do so it will only print what is on the screen.

Parmelia (talk) 00:18, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Parmelia, it is great to meet you! Have you tried posting on the Talk/Discussion page of the article in question? When you posted there, did you include the exact publication date, article title, newspaper name, page number, and journalist name (first and last) of each newspaper article that you cited? These things are ideal for citing a news source! Arthur goes shopping (talk) 01:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The number of 38 yachts is based on this newspaper article, which not only gives the total but explains that there were 25 open racers and 13 International Offshore Racers. So that's not just a typo.

You should indeed edit the current article and improve it rather than write a new one. In particular, the current article has several features your draft lacks, such as footnotes with (more or less) reliable sources (see WP:Referencing for beginners on how to easily create those) and links to related Wikipedia articles. Thus you shouldn't just paste your draft over the existing one.

I'm not quite sure what you want to "print off". There's a "Download as PDF" link in the sidebar, but I expect you're not interested in the draft as it's displayed, but rather in the code so you can re-use some of it to improve the article. You can access it via the "edit source" tab at the top of the draft, between "read" and "view history". Conversely you can use the "edit source" tab at the top of the article to edit and improve it. Huon (talk) 02:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jim Calarco

I have cited many cites other than Internet movie database, I copied a few below including two article support awards and career recognician. How much more do you need? Why is the artciles I cited not good enough? what more do I need, please be more clear? This is about a man not a film as a comment from a reviewer suggests.

Comment: Go beyond the Internet Movie Database. Find news articles to establish notability. Zach Vega (talk to me) 02:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC) http://loonfilms.ca http://www.rodcarley.com/nipissing.php http://www.castnorth.ca/about-us

https://www.sootoday.com/content/arts/details.asp?c=29797 http://www.nugget.ca/2009/01/12/hall-president-humbled-by-honour

ShadowGlider (talk) 05:11, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ShadowGlider! Temporarily setting aside sourcing, you have a number of format issues to touch up. I've left clear comments at the top of your article, and fixed some things in your first paragraph (and at the start of your first list) as an example. Hopefully someone else who's a film expert can give some sourcing advice for you (anyone?). MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:58, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this for real, all my references have been questioned. "Do not worry too much about formatting citations properly. It would be great if you did that, but the main thing is to get references into the article, even if they are not perfectly formatted."

My three original sources meet this criteria I believe "As noted, the sources you use must be reliable; that is, they must be sources that exercise some form of editorial control and have some reputation for fact checking and accuracy. Print sources (and web-based versions of those sources) tend to be the most reliable, though some web-only sources may also be reliable. Examples might include (but are not limited to) books published by major publishing houses, newspapers, magazines, peer-reviewed scholarly journals, websites of any of the above, and other websites that meet the same requirements as a reputable print-based source."

Why am I getting poor support and suggestions do not help, in most cases the suggestions are met and I still get poor feedback. Thank you MatthewVanitas, you gave me more realistic feedback than most. ShadowGlider (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the support editors and reviewers, my article is now online. I have a question.

How do I upload a picture of the subject of my article? It was provided to me by the subject.

Thank you in advance for all your support. ShadowGlider (talk) 07:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of David Tineo

This is my first Wikipedia article, so it's no surprise that my David Tineo article only qualified as Start Class. If I understand the grading correctly, Start Class suggests the sources in my article were substandard. Since all were from published sources however (newspapers, book, etc.), and I'd taken great pains to follow Wikipedia's guidelines for objectivity, I could really use some advice about how to improve these sources. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Thank you,

ElMangosta (talk) 06:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you posted this it has been reclassified as C-class. A Start class rating actually says nothing at all about the sources. The ones you have used so far are generally good so you have nothing to worry about. Start class is basically the default classification for any new article that is longer than a Stub. Further classification will be done by the various WikiProjects that are interested in the article, according to their own classification criteria. While we're on the topic of sources the "Selected exhibitions" section could do with a few more - news or magazine articles about the exhibitions would be ideal. (Unfortunately most galleries' websites don't keep information about past exhibitions.) Another improvement would be to add some content about what critics and commentators have said about his work, take look at magazines and newspapers again. If there are any academic articles about Tineo and his work they are generally considered to be the very best sources. You can also ask for assistance from the interested WikiProjects - follow the links on the talk page. BTW, there is a need for an article about the Chicano Mural Movement, perhaps you could have a go at starting it? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first attempt at Talk. My intent is to thank Dodger67 for the guidance he has offered, and to ask a few follow-up questions about the David Tineo article. If this is the wrong venue for such, please accept my apologies.

1) You suggested I find newspaper articles about some of Tineo's exhibitions, so I did. But I'm not sure how they should be Wiki-coded along with the name of the exhibitions.

2) I've located several newspaper articles by art critics who discuss Tineo's work. But most of the academic articles are in the !Viva Tineo! catalog from the Tucson Museum of Art. Should I break out each individual essay? I placed them all together beneath the !Viva Tineo! title, since that's how they're found, and sort of winged the citation format.

3) There is a Wikipedia article about the Chicano Art Movement with two sections -- one called Chicano Art as Activism/Revolutionary and the other Chicano Art as Community Based -- that basically cover most of what an article about the Chicano Mural Movement would say. Is there a way to link all this together? Or would one have to research and write a new article that contained none of the text covered in those two sections?

4) Wikipedia Commons is pondering the deletion of the image that accompanied my article. I'm therefore following their standard procedures for assuring everyone that this image carries no copyright restrictions, but am having difficulties created by Mr. Tineo's blindness. Surely these difficulties have arisen before, such that procedures are in place to deal with them ... is there a means by which I can cut through this Gordian knot?

5) A Wikipedia editor who has since stopped editing deleted an article about the Tucson Art Museum. This happened several years ago. I'm going to appeal, because I believe the deletion was made in error, but unless a copy of the old article still exists someplace in Wiki-World and can be brought back to life, an appeal would be useless. How do I learn about rules that govern the undead?

6)Thank you once more for all your help and advice. -- ElMangosta (talk) 02:28, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Request to contact "department of development and modernization and innovation)

Здравствуйте!Хочу связаться с отделом разработок и модернизаций или новаций .Хочу предложить новую модель бритвенного устройства для мужчин. 212.110.139.231 (talk) 07:50, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

gTranslate from Russian: Hello, I want to contact the department of development and modernization and innovation. Want to suggest a new model of the shaving device for men MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Привет, в этом случае вы можете быть недоразумений, что Википедия делает. Мы не «продвигать» новых идей, и мы не дизайн или инженерной организации. Мы просто написать энциклопедию статьи, основанные на существующих опубликованных исследований с объективной точки зрения. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brian_J._Townley_(motivational_speaker)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brian_J._Townley_%28motivational_speaker%29

I have reworked this text some to eliminate "peacock" statements. I am having trouble with footnotes and inserting the subject's image. Can someone please help me?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leslyr418 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 20 September 2013 (UTC) Hello, Leslyr418. There's a good essay called WP:Referencing for beginners that should help with your first problem, assuming that you have found some sources that are independent and reliable. About the image: first, make sure that you own the copyright to the image you plan to upload; otherwise, it will be deleted. Then you can donate it to Wikimedia commons at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page . Be aware that the licensing agreement means that the photo can then be used, changed and even sold by anyone who wants to do so. Once it's on file there, you will be given the correct link to use in your article. Good luch —Anne Delong (talk) 04:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Covismarv/sandbox

Ganar dinero

Nosotros sólo aceptamos artículos en Inglés aquí. La Wikipedia en español está en http://es.wikipedia.org - We only accept articles in English here. The Spanish Wikipedia is at http://es.wikipedia.org Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Law Enforcement and Justice Administration in the USA

Question: I submitted an article "Law Enforcement and Justice Administration in the USA" and received the below response. However, I find no trace of it today so I can edit or follow the review process. How do I access my submission? -- Clyde Cronkhite.

Review waiting. This may take several weeks, even months. The Articles for creation process is severely backlogged. Please be patient. There are 2020 submissions waiting for review. ________________________________________ • If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space. • If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here. Please check back here later to see the outcome of your request. • In the meantime, you can continue to improve this article by pressing the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you require extra assistance, you can visit our help desk. Click here to ask a new question at the help desk Click here to get assistance via live help chat
How to improve your article[show]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyde Cronkhite (talk • contribs) 20:06, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, your current tag was at the bottom of the page, I have moved it to the top for better visibility. That said, you really need to go back and look at your formatting. You can't just take a wall of text off of a school paper on MS Word and simply paste it into Wikipedia. We have a certain format we follow, so please take a look at WP:Your first article to see the basics of how we structure articles. That's not addressing content at all, just noting the format is not at all ready, so that would be good to work on while awaiting review. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW - What is the copyright status of a school paper? Does it belong to the student or the school/college? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:56, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arnott Inc.

A few weeks ago I submitted an Article for Creation, for review ... I received what I think is the correct 'box notice' at the bottom ... however today, when checking for progress on the review process, I noted that at the top it states that the article has not been submitted for review ... is this just a remnant? Everything seems to be in order otherwise ... the number of reviews in the waiting seems to have changed, from what I see on the bottom notice ...

Verogreg (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2013 (UTC)verogreg[reply]

The message at the top is indeed an outdated remnant; the draft is correctly submitted for review. It will likely be declined, though, since it's almost exclusively based on primary sources, especially the company's own "about us" page and press releases. To establish that the company is notable enough for an article you will have to show that it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles or reviews in reputable trade magazines.

You should also check the draft's link targets. I somehow doubt the company manufactures spare parts for jaguars... Huon (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]