Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 November 25
Wondering if any editors can evaluate this article before we move it into the article space. Obviously, trying to not get it deleted. Thanks in advance.
Audovox (talk) 02:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- You need to add more references to help prove the article's notability. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
INKAS is one of the most popular security business in the world and thought it would be nice to have some information on them. What does the community think about my article? I already made a separate article for their vehicle manufacturing, but they have a lot more then just vehicle manufacturing. What can I add? What should I remove?
Dillonraphael (talk) 04:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- One suggestion I have is that you might want to perhaps add an infobox. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Please review my article User:Blended brains/Kathy Yolanda Rice and provide feedback to aide me in being able to move this article to live without it getting deleted. The plan is to add a infobox and a image once I figure it out & the article is approved. Just want to say that I have gained a brand new respect and appreciation for Wikipedia and what it is all about since writing this article. Thank You in advance for your help! Blended brains (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Consider taking another look at some phrases in the article for their tone. Phrases like
She wants you to see her art and hear her music, but most importantly, she wants you to feel her creative contributions within your heart and soul.
and
Painting was for her a hobby to help wind down from the stresses of her day job
are just two examples of some sentences in the article that I think need to be looked at and either rewritten/removed. Some phrases just sound like parts of an essay, others I think sound like an advertisement. Hope this is useful. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Simon Lee Gallery e.g. User:svaugu08 or [[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Svaugu08/svaugu08]][edit]
Simon Lee Gallery is a contemporary art gallery located at 12 Berkeley Street, Mayfair London. The gallery was founded in 2002 by the owner Simon Lee.
The primary focus of the gallery is to represent artists of diverse generations whose practices range from painting and sculpture to, photography and film, while still sharing a broad interest in and exploration of the conceptual. The gallery provides a significant London platform, for artists to present their work regularly to a British and an international public, thereby broadening an awareness and understanding of their practice. The gallery is internationally recognised and is one of the leading contemporary art galleries in London. The gallery also regularly punctuates its programme with historical shows of artists such as Donald Judd as well commissioning notable curators to curate annual shows which enables the gallery to present a fresh perspective of current shifts in contemporary art practice and thought, and to continue a broader dialogue with artists outside of the gallery programme.
Simon Lee was a former Director of Gimpels Fils (1989-1992),London, Anthony d’Offay Gallery (1992-1996), London and 11 Duke Street, London (1996-2001). Simon Lee is currently Vice-Chairman of Society of the London Art Dealers (SLAD) organisation which promotes and protects the fine art trade, ensuring responsible fine art dealing.
Svaugu08 (talk) 10:33, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- The article appears to have since been speedily deleted. Sorry. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I am trying to create this article about a website that sells t-shirts and donates 100% of their profit to charity. I am finding it hard to make it 'notable', although Threadless, a very similar (although larger) company have an article on wiki so I am sure it is possible. I only have 2 external sources about the website, a blog posted about it and an article on a well known publishing lifestyle website - I am not sure if this is enough.
SuperAwesomeYeah (talk) 10:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Well, usually if you can't find enough reliable sources it's a sign that the article's subject is not notable enough, and therefore not really suitable for Wikipedia. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Please check this article and let me know if it is notable and the source are reliable. I am unsure myself if I have done a thorough job yet.
SuperAwesomeYeah (talk) 11:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- I provided a few comments above. You have to remember that real people answer these queries, so it can take time, especially with one of our biggest contributors currently away on a Wikibreak ;) Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I have created a page about a scientific instrument. I would like some feed back before it goes live.
Zoe Stanyon (talk) 12:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
please give feedback.
Jhairsnape (talk) 13:34, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Be careful with the article's tone, I think some parts sound like an advertisement or a review for the company. Also, I don't really think you have enough notable reliable references for your article, so that's perhaps something you need to work on. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:34, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I am requesting feedback on what I need to do to improve the article on Stanley Loomis. I know he is notable; he published four highly regarded books that have been issued in multiple editions and languages. I have used reliable and well-documented sources: the New York Times, the Saturday Review. I wrote the article myself, using the available sources, and citing any quotations. I have no conflict of interest. He is long dead; I very much appreciated his books and felt that he deserved to have a Wikipedia entry, since there is very little about him on the Internet (the only sources of information are printed ones dating from the 1960s and 1970s). However, I am new to Wikipedia, and I am sure that the article can be improved, but I really do need some guidance. I'd appreciate any advice you have. The only comment I have received so far is: "This article needs to be wikified (style needs to be improved)." This does not tell me what I need to do.
Pcampsie (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- What whoever commented on your article draft means is that the article needs to be made more like a proper Wikipedia article in terms of formatting and layout. For example, you can use sections to divide up the different parts, rather than the bold font you currently have. Also an infobox would be a good idea as well - it helps to just summarise the key points about the person. As to your references, I think they are good but you do need some web-based references as well perhaps. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I tried my best but I understand there are more to work on. This is about a undergraduate college here in Bangladesh. Please help me to develop it. This is not about promoting the college but more about record the important milestone for the Advancement of Aerospace/Aeronautical Technology in the country. Also to let people know about facts and figures about this. There are many academic organization like BUET, which fells under similar category which are already in Wikipedia. So I hope it will meet all the criteria.
Kaesmaruf 16:32, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really think the article is suitable for Wikipedia at all, to be honest. It doesn't really have any content, and overall it just seems like a phone-book or directory listing or something. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Has any WP:Independent source, like a national newspaper, written about this school? For example, there might be a newspaper article about the school's founding, or a magazine related to aeronautics that wrote about the school's curriculum, or an educational website that announced its accreditation. Finding sources like this (it's okay if they're not written in English) is very important, to comply with the rules for articles about schools. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Any comments gratefully recieved on this article about the work of the not-for-profit science communication organisation the Vega Science Trust. Many thanks
Gekkosmart (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's a good start but really you need to be careful with the tone. Chevymontecarlo - alt 17:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I plan to add a page for the government services group Civica. The company is the larger supplier to local government in the UK and has previously been AIM listed, I believe because of this it fulfils the notability criteria.
I want to ensure notability has been credibly established and that it will not be regarded as a marketing page but factual layout out of the company.
Thanks for your help P.crouch (talk) 18:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
This is only the second Wikipedia page I've ever created and I'm sure that last time I didn't follow any guidelines at all (it was a long time ago!). I'd appreciate any comments on this one. I have used information from the flyleaves of some of his books plus information published in Historic Racing magazine when he joined it.
Allen Brown (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I have been contributing to the Christchurch article but the history section has become too big. I have decided therefore to write a seperate article about the town's history. I would particularly like some feedback about the way it has been divided up and the titles of the sub-sections. Many thanks.
Ykraps (talk) 22:55, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Looks very good. Looks ready to move. I trust your next step is to cut down the the History section of Christchurch, Dorset. write it as a summary of this article and then add the appropriate link.--SPhilbrickT 16:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. Yes, that will be the next step and possibly continue to improve this article too. I will move it into the main space. Perhaps you will do the honour of removing the unreviewed article tag at a later date? Regards--Ykraps (talk) 19:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Done--SPhilbrickT 21:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. Yes, that will be the next step and possibly continue to improve this article too. I will move it into the main space. Perhaps you will do the honour of removing the unreviewed article tag at a later date? Regards--Ykraps (talk) 19:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I am the author of the article on Stanley Loomis. I have requested feedback, and followed up on the suggestions for formatting, adding links, and inserting an infobox. However, previous reviewers suggested that I add Internet references. I want to state that I created this article because there is almost nothing on the Internet about this pre-Internet author (he died in 1972) and I created the article for that very reason. The only sources of information are in hard-copy journals published in the pre-Internet period. I have acknowledged all sources I used in creating the article.
Pcampsie (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your work here. Are there more scholarly reviews of his work you can find? Also there is a reference which says "book flap copy" - this needs to be properly cited (WP:CITEHOW) to the book edition used. Rd232 talk 21:34, 26 November 2010 (UTC)