Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 March 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 23 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 25 >
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 24

[edit]

00:58:09, 24 March 2016 review of submission by DCyphert

[edit]


DCyphert (talk) 00:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted my page, although there seem to be problems with the citation formats. I could not figure out how to edit them. Thanks for your assistance on this!!

Hi DCyphert. It may help you, when you try to edit the references, if you edit the entire draft (i.e. use the edit tab across the top) rather than editing a single section (using edit links after the section headings). The biggest problem with the citations is that three of them are incomplete. "Store to display artist's work" needs at least the name of the newspaper or other publication in which it appeared, and the date of publication. The source published by the Free Public Library in October 1945 needs the title of the book so that a reader can find it in a library. Mattapoistt Presto Press needs the title of the newspaper article.
Of the other two sources, the "Family Tree" is self-published, and thus does not meet Wikipedia's definition of a reliable source. The "Passenger Record" is a primary source. Primary sources may be used, but must be used carefully, and do not demonstrate notability.
You may be interested in the following, if you don't have them already:
  • Kenworthy, Harold (March 19, 1919). "Stories of the 26th Division, part 1 of 2". Boston Post. p. 17.Open access icon
  • Kenworthy, Harold (March 20, 1919). "Stories of the 26th Division, part 2 of 2". Boston Post. p. 12.Open access icon
  • "600 Attending T. C. classes". Fitchburg Sentinel. Fitchburg, Massachusetts. July 1, 1935. p. 9.Open access icon
None of these three help prove notability because they're either by the subject or only mention him in passing, but they may help fill in biographical details. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

05:45:39, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Eugene Nevyerov

[edit]


Dear members of wikipedia! Please allow me to trespass on your valuable time! I will be very short;

Over the years, I have found one thing to be true - when people are interested in something - they turn to wikipedia. We are so used to this fact, - its always there to reassure us and enlighnten us; If something cannot be found on wikipedia - i dare say most of us will feel like it does not exist... or at least feel its not worthwhile to think about;

Recently i become aware of a beautiful thing that goes on in Bay Area - its called Global Tech Symposium - its a annual gathering of inventors and investors; www.globaltechsymposium.com

Our world is shaped by the collaboration of creative genius and people with capital who can recognise potential; How many improvements in human existense can be attributed to this process i dare not even think!

I want to create an article about this Symposium and its creator, my former compatriot Alexandra Johnson; She is doing so mush to bridge USA with ex-soviet states technology-wise; I wanted to create those articles before the Symposium opens this year, but sadly i am not able to!

Please help me! And if you are in Bay Area this coming weeks - please visit GTS event to see what i am talking about with your own eyes!

Thanks Eugene Nevyerov (talk) 05:45, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eugene Nevyerov. The draft has potential. I've commented on the draft regarding what needs to be done. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:55, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Jarmorton

[edit]

Hi there, just trying to put up a page saying who this dude was because I saw a broken link to him on another article. Which of these sources is not a "reliable source", The book by Professor Emeritus Robert Middlekauf, or the collection of letters gathered by the National Archives? Jarmorton (talk) 11:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jarmorton, it's not that the existing sources are problematic, they're just not enough. Even the most famous people in history wrote letters to all sorts of people who are not notable. The letters are in the archive collection because of who the author is, not the addressee, so they don't demonstrate the Notability of GAW. The mention in the book is a start though, if you can find more like that the article might be viable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:43, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12:01:58, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Wave26

[edit]


Hello there!!!, I'm requesting that my draft is to be re-review since all of the suggestions and comments given to it's previous reviewers to my draft are already answered and resolved by fixing and improving my draft through their comments and suggestions given. By these time, I will make a statement of who so ever will review to my draft(article).

I Wave26, created the page Draft:Kenneth Earl Medrano is hereby stated that ALL OF MY REFERENCES of the SUBJECT are VERY VALID, VERY CLEAR, VERY INFORMATIVE and it has NOTABILITY since all of its references came from reliable sources likes newspapers, articles published online by the TV network and the subject is definitely has a REMARKABLE CONTRIBUTION on the world of ENTERTAINMENT. And there's nothing a problem at all that my draft(article) is to be DECLINED by it's reviewers since all of the rules stated on WP:Notability that my draft(article) has PASSED and COMPLIED all of the statements of rules given and required by Wikipedia in regards to Notability to the subject matter. By this time, I will attached these proof of reasons to defend my draft(article) I made to prove to it's reviewers that my draft is VALID and NOTABLE and it is legible to be publish and approve as an article cause of it's informational and encyclopedic and for a variety of reasons:

  • First, Kenneth Earl Medrano has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. And he has done "remarkable" works in terms of his talent like acting and dancing. He became a part in a local variety show in GMA Network in Cebu before his dubsmash hit "Twerk It Like Miley" became viral.
  • Second, Kenneth Earl Medrano is the one who started and originated to "trend" the song Twerk It Like Miley by Brandon Beal in the Philippines through his dubsmash performance that the people catches their attention. These are the reasons why his videos became viral and hit that earned him 2.6 million views overnight and the rest was history, and that's the main reason why he earned the title "THE KING OF DUBSMASH" in the Philippines just what like Maine Mendoza was first discovered and known by the people to her through her viral dubsmash videos on social media before her audition as one of the hosts on Eat Bulaga! and their accidentally paired with Alden Richards and forming their loveteam as Aldub on Kalyeserye, also declaring her as the "THE QUEEN OF DUBSMASH" in the Philippines. In short, Kenneth Earl Medrano is a very popular person and he is very known by the people.
  • Third, Kenneth Earl Medrano is already a "public figure" by the people before he joined the segment "That's My Bae: Twerk It Dance Contest" on Eat Bulaga! due to his viral videos of dubsmash that gains him popularity on social media. And after he was declared as the "Ultimate Bae Grand Winner" on the said contest. So in short, Kenneth Earl Medrano is a notable person.
  • Fourth, Kenneth Earl Medrano has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following already for almost a thousand fans followed him, due to his popularity on the viral video he made and after he wins as the "Ultimate Bae Grand Winner" on That's My Bae: Twerk It Dance Contest on Eat Bulaga! and the same manner he is the leader of the dance group "That's My Baes" that regularly performs and dances on Eat Bulaga! every day, which is one of the rules stated on WP:Entertainer as one of the requirements that an entertainer is to be 'notable', so therefore, there's nothing a problem & a questionable reason at all why is it my draft(article) is still UNACCEPTABLE or DECLINED.
  • Fifth, Kenneth Earl Medrano has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. He already plays and appears on television on GMA Network and one of his major break on his career when he do his major role on Buena Familia as Pacoy Alvero on GMA Network, that caught the people's viewers attention. It's because of their pairing with Kylie Padilla as Celine Buena. His exposure catches the viewers attention, forming their love team as "Kenlie", aside of it's love triangle and rival against Harry, character portrayed by Martin del Rosario. In spite of being a first timer appearance in an actual teleserye, the big impact of the team-up make the people's viewers appreciated and patronized their love-team. Because of this, Kenneth Earl Medrano makes a contribution on television and he has a remarkable image on television that the people always remember of him through his character role.
  • Sixth, Kenneth Earl Medrano made a "CAMEO ROLE" on the blockbuster movie, "My Bebe Love" which is starred by Vic Sotto, Ai-Ai de las Alas together with Alden Richards & Maine Mendoza.
  • Seventh, Kenneth Earl Medrano already won awards like "Most New Handsome Face" & "Best New Male TV Personality" awarded by Social Media TV Poll (SMTVP).
  • Eighth, Kenneth Earl Medrano plays as the main character as Carlo on the Lenten drama presentation of Eat Bulaga! entitled, "Walang Kapalit", which also starred by Allan K, Ruby Rodriguez and Patricia Tumulak, co-hosts of Eat Bulaga!.
  • Kenneth Earl Medrano already won awards like "Most New Handsome Face" & "Best New Male TV Personality" awarded by Social Media TV Poll (SMTVP).
  • I also believe that the info given is neutral, informative, and non biased.
  • There is no conflict of interest as its purpose is for knowledge and no more.
  • There is neutrality towards my subject as I am of no relation to the subject matter.
  • There is also no conflict of interest as I am of no relation may it be professional or familiar. The only point of the creation of this page is for the general's public knowledge of good design.

If you could help me with the page I created and define what I need to change, I will do so accordingly.

Thank you and please do approve of my page, as soon as possible.
Wave26 (talk) 12:01, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You won't convince anyone here that a subject is notable by writing at length saying how great you think he is – particularly if you SHOUT. You will only convince them by including in the article references to reliable published independent sources, which have significant discussion of the subject. Maybe some of the references in the draft qualify – but some don't, so you might help your cause by telling people here which ones to look at. Maproom (talk) 22:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12:42:53, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Kashmirlife142260

[edit]



Please accept the draft Aamir Ali Shah this my first Edit of wikipedia

14:02:45, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Owula kpakpo

[edit]

I am new to wikipedia and this is my first article I am working am having little difficulty referencing on my article could you help me on it. Also my article got declined what are some of the steps i should take to make sure my article is worth being on wikipedia.

Owula kpakpo (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Owula kpakpo:, comments left on your Draft. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:08, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

15:16:00, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Chelseagreenbooks

[edit]

I am trying to set up a history page for Chelsea Green Publishing. It is not an advertisement, but I did copy/paste some copy from our About page. The intent is to set up an account so that I can better server our authors by creating a wikipedia page for them. Not a selling tool, just a get them on the map kind of thing. I can edit the copy for our own page but it will still be from our About page. I don't see how this is any different that a major corporation, of which there are many on Wikipedia. Should I bag it and not bother with Wikipedia - for us OR any future authors? Assumed I'd need an account in order to create new pages anyway. Help? Chelseagreenbooks (talk) 15:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chelseagreenbooks, my honest advice is to bag it. Do not create an article about your company and do not create articles about your authors. Brand recognition, i.e. "just a get them on the map kind of thing", is the very definition of advertising. Your draft was rejected because it read like a blatant advertisement. Indeed it was because it was copypasted verbatim from your website. I have blanked the draft as a copyright violation. Do not restore any of that material. The whole purpose of websites is to sell themselves and their products. Material from them is invariably grossly inappropriate for an encyclopedia, even if it weren't copyrighted. One of the reasons why editing with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia (and editing when you are paid to do this as part of your job even more so) is that it is virtually impossible for such editors to see how promotional their writing is and to write in a neutral, objective way about the subject. If you intend to continue with this draft, write a brief matter-of-fact description of the organization and its history, with no buzz-words, no adjectives, no paraphrasing from your website—just the facts. Source it to multiple independent publications and don't try to "sell" it or any of its authors. If you do that, it will simply be rejected again. I'm going to leave further advice to you on your talk page about conflict of interest editing, paid editing, and changing your user name. Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:24:05, 24 March 2016 review of submission by Pereth-mostu

[edit]


When I was editing the article on Daniel A Stout, the footnote function did not work for Footnotes #9 and #12. They are still appearing as inserts in the text. What can I do to correct this? None of my attempts have been successful.

Pereth-mostu (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When I look at Draft:Daniel A. Stout I see no footnotes at all. All I see is fake dummy links to footnotes, like this [2]. Maproom (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the nowiki tags that were hiding the only valid reference in the draft. So the draft now has one footnote. The source contains another reference, concealed within multiple incorrectly paired nowiki tags, but this was beyond my ability to repair. Maproom (talk) 19:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've figured out what happened. With this edit, you destroyed all the real references and replaced them with fakes dummies. I suggest you revert to the version before that edit, and then re-add the new material. Maproom (talk) 19:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

General question

[edit]

I sometimes post my views, and suggestions for improvement, on the talk page of a draft. I have found that what I write is generally ignored by the creator of the draft, who is perhaps unaware of the existence of the talk page. I wonder if reviewers look at talk pages (which might help them by providing an independent opinion of the article), or whether they are overworked enough as it is. If no-one reads what I write, I'll find a better use for my time. This posting was inspired by Draft:Chloroplast migration, but I've no wish to comment on that particular example, which is not unusual. Maproom (talk) 22:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Maproom:, me personally, I never comment on the Draft Talk page since I don't expect new editors know to look there. I usually just paste them suggestions at the top using template:AFC comment or even write comments and notes in the body their draft using that template or even the Template:Highlight template to make the advice big, bold, and impossible to miss. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, good idea. I'll do that in future. Maproom (talk) 11:07, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

22:05:40, 24 March 2016 review of submission by ShelbyLH

[edit]


ShelbyLH (talk) 22:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Hawai%27i_Rainbow_Wahine_beach_volleyball

I'm questioning because of: Georgia_State_Panthers_beach_volleyball

ShelbyLH (talk) 22:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ShelbyLH. Thank you for making the other stuff exists argument. Georgia State Panthers beach volleyball, like Draft:Hawai'i Rainbow Wahine beach volleyball, fails the notability criteria for teams because it cites only one independent source. It is likely to be deleted if not improved within a reasonable amount of time. If you're familiar with non-college sources that cover U.S. college women's beach volleyball, perhaps you'd like to take on the challenge of improving the range of sources cited by both. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:43, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2016_March_24&oldid=712593192"