Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 October 13
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 12 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 14 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 13
[edit]04:46:31, 13 October 2019 review of submission by Valiyaparambil
[edit]
Even after making all the necessary changes, the article keeps getting declined. Feel like really frustrating. Am new to wikipedia, and not sure if am missing something.
Valiyaparambil (talk) 04:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Debashis Chatterjee was subsequently accepted by DESiegel. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
06:28:08, 13 October 2019 review of submission by Nrahimian
[edit]
I have changed the format to make it more organised ,clear and easy to read. I also added references as requested.
Most of the content goes back to nearly 50 years ago that made it very difficult to find references however I did my best to satisfy your requirements.
I appreciate your time .
Cheers
Nrahimian
Nrahimian (talk) 06:28, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Nrahimian, As this is a biography of a living person, realistically every important claim needs to be sourced, and should have an inline citation. That requires additional reliable, independent sources. Also, while it is not an official criteria for failure, bad grammar may make reviewers assume your article is worse than it actually is. Please endeavor to cleanup the grammar and formatting. If you are not a native english speaker or need help, please ask and someone can assist you. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
13:30:29, 13 October 2019 review of submission by SiamackGhadimi
[edit]Hi, I think this subject will be rise up in future and already many looking for unprocessed foods everywhere, such as sugar free product and... I don't know why it should not be a symbol for future healthy eating. SiamackGhadimi (talk) 13:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- @SiamackGhadimi: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:03, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
13:47:40, 13 October 2019 review of draft by TMWD-WIKI
[edit]
Hello. I was hoping to receive some assistance in relation to my current Wikipedia draft, in relation to John Joseph Davis.
Upon my last submission, my entry was rejected. As (as I was informed) it did not show 'significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject'.
I would kindly like to challenge this query, as I supplied four documents from the National Military Archives of Ireland, which gave first had accounts from soldiers involved in the Irish war on Independence. That John Joseph Davis was indeed involved in and an active member of the Irish Republican Brotherhood, "A company" of the Irish Volunteers, and part of the Buckshot party. I fail to see how this information is not significant evidence, as it is a first hand military account, given to the the Irish Governments Department of Defense. In an official capacity by decorated war veterans. I have also supplied a link to irishmedals.ie which shows account of John Davis' involvement and activity during the war i quote:
"Volunteer, A Company (Enniscorthy Company), Wexford Brigade, Irish Volunteers. Born in 1887 died on the 13th of February 1953, aged about 29 years old during the Rising. Fought in Enniscorthy, Oylegate, and Ferns. He was captured after the Rising and deported being released from Frongoch about Christmas 1916. He was serving as an engineer at the rank of Captain when interned in February 1921. During the Civil War he served as part of the IRA force occupying Enniscorthy Courthouse and Enniscorthy Castle during fighting with National Army forces in July 1922."
I of course respect Wikipedia's integrity and standards for accurate information on their published subjects. However I believe, that I have supplied notable references and citations of both John Davis' involvement, actions and references to skirmishes from both Public (Irish Department of Defense) and Private sources (Irishmedals.ie, independent.ie enniscorthy1916.ie) etc. To illustrate that the information supplied in my article is factual and soundly based.
I also have in my possession, certificates from the Irish Department of defense, relating to that awarding of John Davis the 1916 Easter Rising Medal and The Service Medal (1917-1921) Medal with Bar. I would be happy to upload pictures of both certificates as further proof of John Joseph Davis' involvement. I also possess Johns obituary snippet, which describes his life and involvement within the Irish War of Independence, I could upload this also.
However any assistance you could provide would be greatly appreciated.
Regards.
TMWD-WIKI (talk) 13:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Just a passing note that it is not "significant evidence", but "significant coverage" that Wikipedia needs -- the amount of information in the source. We are not looking for evidence that a subject exists or that they did something, but that sufficient sources have covered the subject in-depth. In other words, a reputable news article or a chapter in a independently-published book or some such that focus specifically on the subject. The sources you have are usable for article content, but not for establishing notability in Wikipedia's terms, because (as far as I can tell) none of them are significant coverage about the person, rather include many individuals for related events. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 14:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- @TMWD-WIKI: To elaborate on what Hellknowz wrote, anyone can claim to be an expert and publish their own website. Self-published websites such as irishmedals.ie are not reliable sources.
- A Wikipedia article should be based mainly on secondary sources. The first hand accounts from militaryarchives.ie are primary sources. Primary sources do not establish the notability of the topic, and may be used only in limited ways on Wikipedia. The certificates you mention would also be primary sources.
- Having those certificates in your possession suggests that you are close enough to the subject to have a conflict of interest. You should avoid creating articles about your family, friends, or colleagues. You may wish to consider alternative outlets with different inclusion criteria, such as FamilySearch, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
21:34:57, 13 October 2019 review of submission by Joeseph Sparrow
[edit]So if my draft query moves off the visible list does that mean it is no longer under consideration for re-review? I read the user page of the user who rejected my draft page and he admits to being biased against companies and corporations. I also read in one notability page that only one regional or national source was needed to determine notability.
"We require the existence of at least one secondary source so that the article can comply with Wikipedia:No original research's requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources." [[1]] I have many sources on this page even though I admit most of them are local sources. I think "The Winnipeg Free Press" and "Siemens Says" would be considered regional sources. What more does the page Draft:Valley Fiber need for inclusion? I have seen many pages that seem less notable to me.
Joeseph Sparrow (talk) 21:34, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Firstly thanks, I got my copy reviewed really quickly, really quickly(!), some of the instructions suggested it may take 8 weeks, or so. And apologies, I'm new to editing Wikipedia pages (as you've probably guessed!)
Is it possible to help me with the comments on my rejection?
I don't doubt that my writing style might not match the style required in an encyclopedia: this is my first page. Most of my writing is academic, which I guess isn't a suitable style for an encyclopedic entry - I'm not presenting literature reviews, original research etc. I'm not disappointed, I'm just hoping to learn!
However, the comment that it is an 'advert' is a little vague, in that it isn't a commercial product. It is a fact that Enguage /is/ open source software. Is /is/ the case that Enguage won the BSC SGAI Machine Intelligence Competition in 2016, which should make it notable(!), and I've included links to verify this, and so on. However, while some of the references do cite my own work, and I do include the COI marker(!), they are all in peer-reviewed journals, so all claims are independently verified. Further, it is not something I've just made up it represents over 12 years of research. It is written in a neutral point of view: I certainly haven't used judgemental language/superlatives (e.g. "this is world leading/the greatest..." etc) So, at what point does it cross the line into being an advert?
Is there a 'starting point' where it goes wrong? Or do you not like the whole thing? I've tried to model my page on "Cucumber (Software)", but because my system 'programs in natural language' it's not a run-of-the-mill software program. Should articles like this be written by a third party (another wikipeidan?) If so, surely there is the need for that editor to be an expert in my software?
Should I have started with a shorter article? One of the problems with Enguage is that it is complex, and in explaining one thing drags a whole load of other things in.
Thanks in advance for any suggestions, Martin.
MartinWheatman (talk) 23:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC) MartinWheatman (talk) 23:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Martinwheatman, I understand having an article about your own work declined doesn't feel great, although glad we could get to it quickly. The critical advertising problem here is the lack of good sources. Most of the sources are not independent of the subject. What you need is to find more sources, ideally in the form of news articles or other journal papers. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)