Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 June 4
Hello! This is my first wiki page. I would like to know if this is a "good" informational start about this notable person (Dr. Hall). How many other external sources should I include... is video and radio clips ok? Thank you!
Aimeilee (talk) 02:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- intent.com is a blog, and not a reliable source.
- More references (to reliable sources) would help.
- Don't link Amazon in the book ref; just give the book info itself
- Add Wikilinks, e.g.
...at the [[World Trade Center]] in New York. After working over a decade on [[Wall Street]]...
...at the World Trade Center in New York. After working over a decade on Wall Street...
- Don't put external links in the body text (ie http://www.mindfullivingnetwork.com/) - only in ==External links==
- Start with a sentence that says what/who she is - e.g. "Dr. Kathleen Hall (12 August 1951 to present) is a businesswoman and author from Canada." or whatever.
- "Alter Your Life®" - get rid of the "®" and put it in italics, Alter Your Life
- There is no fixed number of external links, but try to keep it to a minimum; only links that add information that could not otherwise be incorporated. Typically, maybe 3-5. Video/radio clip links are OK as long as they are official - links to copied video/audio on e.g. YouTube is not permitted. See WP:EL. Chzz ► 12:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
I clarified some things in the article, because someone had deleted relevant information under the pretense of it being incomplete. I don't have time to figure out the citation format and would appreciate someone cleaning up what I have written to meet wiki standards.
96.49.43.246 (talk) 04:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- I formatted that one reference for the quote - but it does need more references. See WP:REFB. Chzz ► 12:14, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Also, it seems overly reliant on quotes. You should work to rephrase things, otherwise you'll run afoul of our guidelines for copyrights. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Looking for your valuable reviews
Amitsang2000 (talk) 11:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- I guess you mean Crown University. I think that will be speedy-deleted as promotional - it's tagged for that. It's not neutral.
- Please refer to the business FAQ. Chzz ► 12:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Exactly. I just deleted the article per speedy deletion criterion G11 as a page unambiguously meant to advertise the school. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Smithau (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia godheads,
I'm trying to make a page for The Art of War GN that comes out in 2012. While creating I noticed that the author tried to make the very same page in 2009 and it was deleted for "crystal ballery" and because it wasn't notable yet. I read the reasoning behind it, so I was wondering if this article was more valid? As you can see in the references there seems to be a legitimate interest in the book, it's been covered by multiple major comic book sites and the USA Today pop culture blog, and the sample has been read over 25,000 times. I think it's notable enough, but I want to make sure with you guys first.
Thank you for all your time and your help,
Kingofbreaker (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
It has been a very long time since I have created a new article. I have forgotten some of the basic stuff, but I would appreciate help fixing links in the indicated (bolded spots, where necessary. As far as I know, the information itself is accurate.
da laffin tlhIngan (talk) 16:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
This is my first page, just wanted to get some feedback on the look/feel and make sure it was up to Wikipedia standards. Thanks.
Expectingrain5 (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- You seem to have done pretty well, but there are a few style issues.
- Don't leave the references as bare URLs. That just leads to problems down the road. I have fixed most of this for you.
- Add some categories to make it easier for people to find your article.
- Try and proofread. There are some issues that need to be worked on, like sentence fragments.
- Hope that helps. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Please review for submission. Is everything allowed?
S3t3liz (talk) 18:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Frankly, this is a minor local program which has no place in a global encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi there,
If you are reading this, please help me getting this article a proper wiki place.
I am a total newbie to Wiki creativities. Hope you guide/help me getting this page on and help me gaining the experience I need to add more pages to Wiki.
I look forward to reading your inputs on the same.
Thanks & Regards,
Syed.//
Syed (talk) 18:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- There are some style issues, but content-wise it looks pretty good. You should add some categories, make sure that you don't write the references all in caps, and give a name to your external link instead of leaving it bare. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Posting a basic synopsis of the Ottawa International Film Festival, a festival in its second year that has been gaining publicity and noteriety. Thanks!
Highlightergirl (talk) 19:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)¡
- You don't seem to have proven notability yet. The General Notability Guidelines recommend multiple, reliable, independent sources to prove notability. I don't doubt that this is notable, but you need to show it through your sources. Other than that:
- Bare URLs in the reference section should be avoided. Try using the Web-citation template.
- Wikify a bit more. Your key terms, such as Ottawa, should be wikilinked.
- You should add some categories to make it easier for people to find.
- External links should not be in the main body of the text. It looks like advertising, which is not allowed.
- I hope this helps. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
www.dotrunplay.com[edit]
Banjax Bob (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
The article is self-referental, and was previously edited to make a new neologistic term appear more valid and widely used than it is regarded.
For example, before my edits, a section read: In "Addressing sexual orientation and sex and/or gender identity discrimination - Consultation Report 2011", the authors referred to this submission when they recommended intersex, sex and/or gender diverse as one possible term which ' might be included in federal anti-discrimination law' as part of their suggested ‘guiding principle [that] terminology should be kept as broad as possible with reference to the attribute that is being discriminated against rather than identities (which are always contested and exclusionary)'.
(my emphases).
The actual source lists sources suggested in submissions by third parties.
I have changed the text to read: In "Addressing sexual orientation and sex and/or gender identity discrimination - Consultation Report 2011", the authors referred to submissions by SAGE Australia and Still Fierce [1] when they listed intersex, sex and/or gender diverse as one possible term which 'participants suggested might be included in federal anti-discrimination law' as part of their suggested ‘guiding principle [that] terminology should be kept as broad as possible with reference to the attribute that is being discriminated against rather than identities (which are always contested and exclusionary)'[2]. The SAGE Australia submission was prepared by Dr Tracie O'Keefe [3]