Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 July 31
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < July 30 | << Jun | July | Aug >> | August 1 > |
| 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. |
July 31[edit]
12:01:39, 31 July 2018 review of submission by PeterMcClintock[edit]
I would like a colleague to be able to edit in the meanwhile, in particular to add extra references. How can I do that?
Peter McC.
PeterMcClintock (talk) 12:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi PeterMcClintock. Anyone can edit the draft, there isn't anything you need to do to give permission for that. If your colleague has an account, and you know their user name, then to help them find what you've been working on you could leave a message on their talk page containing a link to the draft formed with the code
[[Draft:Ionic Coulomb blockade]].
13:25:44, 31 July 2018 review of submission by Wolftrex458[edit]
- Wolftrex458 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
Wolftrex458 (talk) 13:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
13:25:44, 31 July 2018 review of submission by Wolftrex458
But doesn't dismiss the whole point of view. There are other Actress who have acted far less and yet still have a Wikipedia page. I followed Tom cruise page as in reguards to the style of page you like. I do feel that if viewed through a person who wasn't so rude Jon page wouldn't of received the criticism it did.
- Wolftrex458 - you need to provide links to what Reliable sources say about the user. Please read the general guidelines for inclusion, and for actresses Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:57, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Wolftrex458 Greetings. I believe you are referring to Draft:Jon Mack (Actress) page which you have previously posted two messages on AfC Help Desk -see here Request on 16:33:57, 30 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Wolftrex458 - see as below here:
| Request on 16:33:57, 30 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Wolftrex458] |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Wolftrex458 (talk · contribs) (TB) Draft:Jon Mack (Actress) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Ok Im confused. I didn't use any webpages that was hers. I didn't use any social media. I even followed the lay out and guides of Tom Cruises page. Every link is independent. Every verification is independent. She has starred in films which I use the official page if not IMDB's link. She is a musician I linked proof of each CD. And she runs a charity which I linked news sources for verification. I am completely baffled. Someone tell me the exact reason why this page wasn't accepted. Wolftrex458 (talk) 12:33 am, 1 July 2018, Sunday (1 month, 1 day ago) (UTC+8) Hi Wolftrex458. Examine the first paragraph of the draft. English Sentences Should Not be Written with Every Important Word Capitalized. All of the occupations and job titles should be lowercase. There are six external links in the paragraph. They are not allowed in running text. If they can verify the text, format them as references instead, as explained in Help:Referencing for beginners. An independent source is one not closely affiliated with Mack. An organization that she founded and is the president of is closely affiliated with her, so defendingtheendangered.com is not independent. Also, it fails to verify that she is the founder (and there must be a better source for her being president than a white caption on a mostly white background within a video). Verification is also a problem with fhffsd.org, which doesn't say anything about the 2015 nominees. If you meant that the information is somewhere on that website, then link to the exact web page where it appears. IMDb is user-generated, so it is not a reliable source, and should not be used as a reference. It's doubtful that World Animal News is a reliable source (no reputation for accuracy and fact checking) and the piece appears to be a press release from Mack's organization, so not independent. "Stunningly beautiful" and "tireless worker" are peacock language. Such puffery doesn't belong in Wikipedia. The paragraph ends with something that isn't a complete sentence. The lead section fails to summarize the body of the article. It contains information that isn't in the body. See WP:LEAD for more information. All of the above are problems, but the exact reason the draft was declined was that it fails to establish that Mack is notable. The first sentence or two should make it clear why she is notable and should be backed up in the body by independent, reliable, secondary sources. The lead fails to make any claim of notability. She heads a non-notable charity. She had a bit role in one episode of a TV series. She had a supporting role in a non-notable film, for which she failed to win an award at a non-notable festival. And she's in a non-notable band. All of which leaves the reader wondering, "So what"? --Worldbruce (talk) 3:13 am, 1 July 2018, Sunday (1 month, 1 day ago) (UTC+8) Ok so from your reply I am led to believe that Actors and Actresses who haven't got that major lead role yet are looked down upon by Wikipedia as a nothing? so the 20 or so roles she has had in movies don't count? So am I right in thinking this is just an elitist page? Now Wikipedia post pages about unproven theories. from you are saying you only support facts? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang this is an unproven theory, it has no basis in facts. There is no scientific proof for this. There are 5millions pages on Wikipedia? I could guarantee I could go "so what" on half of them. your reply was rude, heartless, I asked for advice as to why, I didn't ask for a self centered cold hearted none human. If there was an option to report the reply I would make one. Wolftrex458 (talk) 2:17 am, 2 July 2018, Monday (30 days ago) (UTC+8) Wolftrex458 - I think a comparison between Ms Mack and the Big Bang Theory slightly overplays the former's significance. KJP1 (talk) 1:16 am, 2 July 2018, Monday (30 days ago) (UTC+8) Wolftrex458 - Hi, kindly calm down. Wikipedia has a WP:CIVIL policy. Comment on actions but not on name calling on editor especially Wolfrex458 volunteered their free time to evaluate your draft based on Wikipedia guidelines. I understand you are disappointed that you draft is not accepted at this stage but do understand that subjects would grant a page in Wikipedia if they are notable under Wikipedia guidelines. actor notability is established based on significant coverage from reliable source which are independent from the subject, such as source from major newspaper that "directly" talk about the subject and not merely passing mention. There are a lot of pages which should not belong in Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, and the Wikipedia volunteers have yet to come around to work on them. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk)7:06 pm, 2 July 2018, Monday (29 days ago) (UTC+8) |
- Please read below and the click on the blue highlighted texts for details info
- Note at the current stage, the page could not be accepted as they are no sources support the content claimed. (No sources = No notability= No verification=No Wikipedia page)
- Please read (1)WP:Your First Article, (2) referencing for beginners and (3) Wikipedia notability requirement for actors/actresses for familiar yourself on how to write an article and citing (inline citation) in Wikipedia and the requirement need (notability) for an actress.
- Please note content claimed need to support by (1)independent, (2)reliable (3)secondary sources with (4)significant coverage
- please re-read the comments on the previous replies above and check out the links provided
- if anything else it missing or not clear from the above, kindly visit Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything.
- If you are not referring to Draft:Jon Mack (Actress) page then please advise what is the intended page of your comment. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 14:17, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to publish the following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:AnitaDSK/sandbox&action=edit The reason is that - from an objective point of view - this company has contributed greatly in setting the current standards relating to safe storage of hazardous substances/flammable liquids inside buildings, thus actively preventing risks of fire. Thus, this company is highly relevant to the entire issue of storing hazardous substances.
Unfortunately, my article was rejected. Kindly let me know how I can change so that it won't be rejected again.
Thank you very much in advance!
AnitaDSK (talk) 13:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:AnitaDSK#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
