Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 July 23
- This is a new article I'd like to publish. Please provide feedback including whether it is ready to be published as is. Thanks.
P.S. I just added another External link resource.
~~Software-surprise (talk) 02:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Software-surprise. I took a look at your article about Screenshot Marketing. While the subject could be notable, the article as it stands now does not prove Notability one reason being that there are no references for any asserted facts. You'll also need to study Citing sources for ideas on how to improve the inline-citation aspect of this article.
- Hope that helps! Shearonink (talk) 03:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Please review for publication. I edited it and added a citation (thanks Shearonink).
Thanks.
~~Software-surprise (talk) 05:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Glad to see you added that one reference, however to prove Notability an article will need multiple third-party sources or references that are verifiable and reliable. At Notability please pay special attention to the General notability guideline. In your rough draft an inline citation is needed for every asserted fact ("citation needed"). FYI - There is no need to post a new "Subject" every time you edit something on Screenshot Marketing, simply post further down within the same Request for Feedback. Shearonink (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I would welcome any constructive feedback on this piece I've drafted. Thanks for your time.
This former draft is now a WIkipedia article Lawrence Susskind (my comments are about the article). While the article as a whole seems to be well-sourced, the following sections are problematic.
- Personal Life is completely-unsourced.
- All the asserted facts in Academic Career are not sourced.
- Shearonink (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Looks like a conflict of interest, advertisement, resume, fluff piece to me. Off2riorob (talk) 19:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Pianotech for your advice, however when I try to add citations the article repeats the number ref [1] example taht is already listed against another, and then it just links to the Wikipedia page of the article rather than the website with reliable sources.
I have tried several times, am I missing something out? What I did- Beside the first text that I want reference (link) Look under Works- Bunnets and Bowlers
I added [1] and when I saved change it repeats ref [1] which just links to the article page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Whittingham
This is my first article for Wikipedia and I am keen to get a grip on how to produce good articles.
~~ScotlandLiteraryLady (talk) 09:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
ScotlandLiteraryLady - I think I fixed that link for you, take a look. I removed the 'ref' tags and retitled it. Hope that helps! If not, leave a message on my Talkpage or ask any Editing questions in the Wikipedia Help Channel. Shearonink (talk) 23:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Discription of the Games Makers, the volunteers for the London 2012 Olympics. This article contain info about previous Olympic Volunteers, and what makes Games Makers different. The Article links to various Olympic related sites. All the information is credible, and in line with the London Organising Commitee of the Olypmic Games discriptions of the role.
~~GamesMaker (talk) 10:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I have Already completed the review request and move the article from used space to main space but still getting not review message
~~regards deepak (talk) 10:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean; please send me a message and I will discuss this there with you. Chevymontecarlo - alt 05:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
I have now "published" this from draft (I asked for review 3 days ago). So, if it needs comments, please do so)
There are some issues with the article.
- I was unable to find any online mentions of 'The Big Fake Biography of Chris Sanders'? Plus the ISBN is invalid, the entry should be fixed or deleted.
- Links to social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook are links normally to be avoided.
- Answer.Com is not a reliable, verifiable source and the linkage adds nothing to the article.
- The linkage to the YouTube channel is problematic because of copyright concerns.
If you need to see an example of a well-written Wikipedia article about rock musician/s, take a look at Mötley Crüe.
- Shearonink (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello Everyone,
I am just trying to get a little more feedback on my first wikipedia page. I would appreciate some constructive criticism.
Thank you,
Just looking for general feedback on this page
- Wow, definitely a lot of information on there. I would say add names to the references, like this:
Example sentence <ref>[http://www.examplearticle.com/2346|Example article name]</ref>
It's more useful to the reader if they have an idea of what the link is rather than just a bare URL which is not as useful. Chevymontecarlo - alt 05:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm trying to write an article about a non-profit organization dedicated to increasing access to arts education. Please take a look and let me know how to make this article ready to be published on Wiki. Thanks.
- I made a few improvements to the article's sections and reference names, as there were a few mistakes. Please try and find more reliable references for the rest of the article other than just the first part of the article. Thanks. Chevymontecarlo - alt 05:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
This has been revised again including additional citations, restructure and great revisions from an unknown user (many thanks).
I'd like to publish it as soon as possible, so please provide your feedback. Thanks much.
~~Software-surprise (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Please do not start another completely new subject/header for any further edits or Feedback on this proposed article. Just hit the 'edit' button that is to the immediate right of this subject and you will be able to respond to any of my points and the material for all the changes will be in one place. Creating a completely new section for every change makes it hard to follow the discussion.
- For any other editors wishing to see the other requests and responses, look at [1] and [2] from the July 23rd RfF.
The proposed article has improved but there are still some issues.
- The 'External Link' seems to have little to do with the subject, it should be deleted.
- The 'Eyetracking Update' does not directly mention the subject and should also be deleted.
- Have you read Notability yet? The General notability guideline can be especially helpful.
The best thing is to find outside/reliable sources that have written about 'screenshot marketing' in articles, or reported about the subject through news outlets. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for the digital age and every asserted fact on its pages should be verifiable.
- Shearonink (talk) 03:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)