Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 March 29
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < March 28 | << Feb | March | Apr >> | March 30 > |
| 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 29[edit]
02:55:06, 29 March 2016 review of submission by Mike calvino[edit]
- Mike calvino (talk · contribs)
I thought i did actually reference the information properly and having read the 'how to reference' article but I'm still stumped as to which parts are not referenced accordingly.. is there a way to have the errors highlighted by the editor so that i know which parts to fix?
- Hi Mike calvino. In the biography section, the last sentence and a half of paragraph 1 are apt to be challenged in the absence of inline citations. Paragraphs 3, 4, 5, and 6 cite no sources. Where you use video as a source it's highly desirable, although not required, to do two extra things. Indicate the point of time during the video that supports the article (e.g. |minutes=2:27 minutes in), and, so long as that portion of the source is no more than a few sentences, transcribe it as a quote within the citation. (see template {{cite AV media}} for technical details). Video sources tend to be available only in certain regions and only for a limited time, and archiving of video sources is generally poorer than archiving of print sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
ShelbyLH (talk) 02:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
@Worldbruce: YES! The Hon Star-Advertiser will be another excellent source, in addition to those previously mentioned. As a matter of fact they already are, with paragraphs to boot! ;-) I do read the paper, daily, but the website does have a paywall to get around unfortunately. I'll try it anyway.
I'm also believing that this space *here* is where I can reach you. In any case, thanks for all of the info. / help. ShelbyLH (talk) 02:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
09:12:05, 29 March 2016 review of submission by Vikash pon rajendran[edit]
Hi,
I have given reference for the draft T. Santhanam. reference are from reliable sources only. further that are the direct interview and the article about the notable person. please help me, how to correct the article
14:22:37, 29 March 2016 review of submission by Gfroding[edit]
Good morning. I tried to write an article detailing FideliTrade Incorporated. Can someone help me and let me know why the original post wasn't accepted yet? Please let me know if there is anything I need to remove. Thank you for your help. Gfroding (talk) 14:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Gfroding. The delay was an oversight on our part. User:Gfroding/sandbox should not have been declined on the grounds of being a duplicate of Draft:FideliTrade Incorporated, because the draft was not waiting for a review at the time. I have submitted the draft on your behalf, and it will be reviewed within the next few weeks. Kiplinger is an independent, reliable, secondary source, but some of the other sources cited may not be. While you wait, I suggest you try to replace the sources that don't measure up with better sources. Think mainstream financial press, like The Wall Street Journal, Barrons, Fortune, Business Week, etc. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:16, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
16:12:31, 29 March 2016 review of submission by Mcf.white[edit]
Hi. I recently submitted a page and it was declined. I was hoping to find out why so I might correct the issue.
Mcf.white (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Mcf.white. The draft was declined for failing to show that the subject meets the notability guideline for inclusion in Wikipedia. The draft's thesis seems to be that "being quoted in many interviews with journalists as well as writing his own articles for publication" makes the subject notable. It does not. You may find the essay "No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability" illuminating. The only way forward would be to find in-depth coverage about the subject rather than by the subject or briefly quoting the subject. If such coverage exists, the draft still faces an uphill struggle, as it currently reads like a resume regurgitated by a PR firm rather than a biography in an encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- Grimbold292 (talk · contribs)
Hey, I'm sorry for the confusion - but I'm not fully sure why the sources on my Gideon King article aren't appropriately independent. Many of these articles are either full on reviews of Gideon King's musical work from independent sources or high level publications like the New York Times writing about statements he released. I have a lot of D-13's discussing Gideon King - would those help establish notability? I'm not sure what else I can put in - these are all the biggest publications that I found that reference him - and as far as I can tell none of these are passing mentions. Grimbold292 (talk) 16:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
18:12:48, 29 March 2016 review of submission by 94.245.27.237[edit]
- 94.245.27.237 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
94.245.27.237 (talk) 18:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
hi i am new at this website i am trying to create a page for my mother but i do not know how should i provide source to authenticate what i have written. kindly help me with suggestions and please anyone tell me what information do i need to provide.