User talk:Aaron Booth/Archive 2

Can you help? Londonderry Flax Industry

Hi Aaron! Thanks for taking alook at my article. Can you please provide more information on making it Wiki-worthy? The comments just said, "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable, independent sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified, and reliable independent sources are needed to establish the notability of the subject." A listed a few dozen reliable sources. Did I just cite incorrectly? This is actually a piece of original research, done by me about a decade ago. It was accepted by the American Textile History Museum in Lowell, Massachsetts as part of their archives. For a period of time, there was a group in Londonderry trying to raise funds for their own museum so that people could learn about this part of New England History. I'd appreciate further comment so that it could be made available to the public. Thank you :) Mnsesq (talk) 10:10, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

There are a few issues in the article at this point that need to be addressed:

• The article needs to be broken into sections beginning with level 2 "==" headers.
• Second, the article has some formatting issues. Though we don't indent the beginnings of paragraphs, it is sometimes necessary to indent entire paragraphs, groups of lines for the purpose of quotations. For this purpose we use: Template:Quote_box. For all other purposes of indentation we use a colon rather than the "tab" key. \
• For inline citations, refer to WP:CITEFOOT for help here. There is also a tool in the edit window under "Cite" and then there is a drop down box entitled "templates." Also, when citing a book, make sure to include the ISBN number whenever possible.

If these things can get done, then the article will be in much better shape, and will be considerably more likely to be accepted. Let me know if you need help or have anymore questions! -Aaron Booth (talk) 15:23, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Paladin Academy, Blaine MN - Review of Article for Creation

Hi Aaron, I really appreciate your comments. I guess that even in my attempt to stay neutral, I was writing in the same "voice" I use when I am telling everyone how much I value the school. I have made dramatic changes and I am wondering if you could take a look at it and tell me if it still sounds biased or like an advertisement. Any feedback you can give will be greatly appreciated. Thanks for you help.

Leisairwin (talk) 12:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The article looks much better. I went through and cleaned up your references, placed the URLS within the citations and corrected a typo. I accepted the article, moved it, and tagged it for WikiProjects on its talk page. Thanks!

I actually grew up in Blaine :)

-Aaron Booth (talk) 15:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC) Done

PAGEANT DOCUMENTARY

Hi, Aaron

Thanks for looking at my submission. Perhaps you can clarify-this film does fit all the following criteria: t: The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics. IT WAS REVIEWED BY THE VILLAGE VOICE AND SEVERL OTHERS. The film is historically notable, as evidenced by one or more of the following: Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release. THERE ARE SEVERAL WHICH I INCLUDED IN BIBLIOGRAPHY The film was deemed notable by a broad survey of film critics, academics, or movie professionals, when such a poll was conducted at least five years after the film's release.[2] IT WON 10 FILM FESTIVAL AWARDS The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release. SEE ABOVE The film was featured as part of a documentary, program, or retrospective on the history of cinema. CINEMAQUEER INCLUDED IT AS A FEATURE IN THEIR GAY CINEMA FESTIVAL The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.[3] IT WON 10 FILM FESTIVAL AWARDS

SO....IS IT SIMPLY THE WAY I HAVE WRITTEN IT? DO I NEED TO CITE FROM TEH VILLAGE VOICE? DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS PARTICULARLY ENCYCLOPEDIC... Any clarifications YOU can give me (the guidelines Wiki has are clearly not helping as I've gone by those; and "how to write article, etc" help pages as well) would be most gratefully received.

Bonchic (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)BONCHICBonchic (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Aaron. This is helpful.

Bonchic (talk) 21:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)BonchicBonchic (talk) 21:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

It is partially the way it was written. The article is a brief mention that really does not, in it self, lend notability to the subject, which may or may not be notable. However, it does look like it could be possible with some rewriting to establish notability.

The article needs inline citations. Individual statements within the article need to be cited. Without inline citations, it is difficult to establish notability due to, if nothing else, the vagueness of where the information came from. For inline citations, refer to WP:CITEFOOT for help here. There is also a tool in the edit window under "Cite" and then there is a drop down box entitled "templates." Also, when citing a book, make sure to include the ISBN number whenever possible.

The article also needs a lead section.

More in depth information regarding cast, filming, budget, any groundbreaking aspects, or enduring practices or concepts. Including more detailed information will help greatly in establishing notability.

-Aaron Booth (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Beynon Sports

Aaron could you let me know what I need to do to have this page accepted? Is it the wording that needs to be ammended? In terms of content eveything is backed up by outside sources and not just the Beynon website. I will gladly make the changes I just want to know what they should be, thanks. (Sprinter9 (talk) 13:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC))

The article does in fact rely primarily upon the Beynon website for citations, which is problematic, however not the most problematic at the moment.

The largest problem at the moment is the tone/wording of the article. It reads like something that the company would put in a newspaper add, or a brochure to sell their product.

Some words and phrases in the article that should be watched out for (not completely inclusive but there are many of them).

• "Beynon Sports Surfaces' offers a wide range of products"
• "also offer a wide range of"
• "not only enable record breaking..."
• "...training friendly."
• "most recognized and prestigious name in the artificial turf market" <- Particularly without citation
• "some of the most recognized and prestigious"
• "Recent notable..."
• "PolyTurf is a full-depth, poured-in-place polyurethane system that offers maximum durability with minimal maintenance."
• "The PolyTurf SP system is a smooth surface that utilizes revolutionary BEYPUR 500 technology to provide a non- textured surface that repels the wear and indentation of spikes."
• "PolyTurf Plus features a bio-engineered force reduction layer beneath the PolyTurf wear layer to increase return of energy and shock absorbency"
• "The PolyTurf Plus Pad and Pour can be customized to meet any faciilties needs. It has a two-component polyurethane choke coat layer and a self-leveling polyurethane wear coat layer that offers long lasting durability."
• "...the numerous surfaces Beynon Sports Surfaces has installed over the years"

-Aaron Booth (talk) 16:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Aaron I've edited out the "marketing" talk, could you please review again? I wrote a paper on them more than a year ago and I've been trying to add a page to Wikipedia since then...tough to fit in with work commitments. Regardless of the company you look at in the track industry the information is presented the same way. While it is a big industry and from the research I did Beynon is by far the biggest in outdoor tracks in the US, most of the information is obtained by going to the websites, searching for 3rd party interviews, athletic meets sponsored at the collegiant level, looking in the IAAF websites for approved surfaces and litteraly counting how many each company has approved, etc. My goal was to have a central place people could go to look up information but also add information to the page. Hopefully people will make one for Mondo, Rekortan, Regupol, Cal Tracks and the other track players in the industry. (Sprinter9 (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC))

Done. -Aaron Booth (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Elec-Trak electric tractors

Mr. Booth, I understand that the Elec-Trak article I submitted is really a stub, and probably should be marked so, and I recognize that I'm a poor writer. But I thought that by including direct links to long-standing groups of Elec-Trak aficionados, the extensive documentation and homage sites, and the organizations providing newly-made and reproduction parts, I had effectively demonstrated the notability and importance of the vehicle. People have lavished many millions of hours on these little tractors; it's remarkable how many of them are still in use - almost certainly a far higher proportion than (for instance) the Ford N-series, which already have their own wikipedia page (and deservedly so, despite the scant mention of the controversy regarding Ford's successful theft of the 3-point hitch design from Ferguson).

The Elec-trak is a seminal design, and truly a landmark electric vehicle. It has thousands of vocal admirers despite having seen very limited production. It is well known to everyone involved in sustainable agriculture and everyone involved in electric vehicle design. People have actually built bolt-for-bolt recreations from scratch! It is extremely notable, and deserves a wikipedia page, regardless of who writes it. I'm sorry I didn't get that across in my attempt at creating a page.

I hope you will reconsider your rejection of the article so that can get out of the pending article ghetto and be improved and expanded by people who have more knowledge and writing chops than I do. If you can give me more specific criticisms, though, I'll be happy to rewrite it as directed.

Thank you for your consideration, --Charlie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.180.229 (talk) 14:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

• A good suggestion might be for you to seek help on the talk page of a related WikiProject such as: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Agriculture. Someone there will likely be knowledgeable and quite willing to step in and help you out with the article. Right now it needs inline citations, and expansion to establish notability. -Aaron Booth (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for the advice, will do. --Charlie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.180.229 (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Gary M. Feinman rejection

Hi there Aaron,

I'm the author of the page on Gary Feinman that you reviewed. I want to contest your decision to decline, as he meets two of the criteria for "notability". First, he was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which is a highly prestigious award. Second, he is currently the co-editor of the Journal of Archaeological Research and the past editor of Latin American Antiqutiy, both of which are prestigious journals. Both are noted on the page. Thus, he should be included in Wikipedia. Thanks.

--KingH81 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingh81 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Right now the article needs expansion and more citations to go with that. Right now the article has little as far as depth sources from third parties. (ie. not something he wrote) See WP:ACADEMIC for help on establishing notability. -Aaron Booth (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I used WP:ACADEMIC and I guess I am not clear on what you mean by citations. The last paragraph establishes his editorship of two important journals and his being a Fellow of the AAAS. Each independently is a criteron for notibility and inclusion in Wikipedia. I'm not sure how you want me to cite these--a link to the journals? A link to the AAAS page? They are linked to the Wikipedia entries for the journals and the AAAS. Please provide more detail in what kind of citation you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingh81 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Added citations to the journals he has edited and a link to AAAS Fellows page. Also to Social Sciences Citation Index page for him Kingh81 (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright, there were three sources that fail verification that I just removed. In other words, the information that they were claimed to cite was not present in the material given as a source. We are now left with three sources, two of which were authored by the subject himself, which does not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. The one that were are left with only serves to mention that he is an editor for a journal. Therefore at this time, he is non notable for merely being an editor for a journal, and author of a book, without substantial coverage in third party sources. -Aaron Booth (talk) 03:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Added detailed link to AAAS news showing the AAAS Fellows election and that Gary is one of the elected under anthropology--you need to scroll a bit down to find it, but it is there and fulfills the following criteria for notability: "The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g. a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a Fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g. the IEEE)." Also added link to SAA news containing a thank you from the SAA president to Gary for his work as co-editor of Latin American Antiqity, which fulfills the criterion for following notability: "The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major well-established academic journal in their subject area." That you accept he is current co-editorship of Journal of Archaeological Research should have established him as notable itself, in my opinion. The link to the Social Sciences Citation Index works for me--you or your institution may not be a subscriber, but the link does work and establishes notability under the following criteria: "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." Thus Gary fulfills the critera for notability in three separate areas and I ask you to remove your decline. Thanks. Kingh81 (talk) 13:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, I just found that Gary is already listed on Wikipedia's list of archaeologists, and clicking on his name leads to a page asking for a page for Gary to be created, which is what I did. Please remove your decline and post my article about Gary. Thanks. Kingh81 (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I just got back from rehearsal for the day and will take a look at it shortly this evening. However to clarify: inclusion in a list elsewhere on Wikipedia does not mean that the person is notable for an individual article. Also, the page you reached is generic and you will get it for anything that doesn't have a page, for example: THis is an example -Aaron Booth (talk) 01:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

That being said, I just reviewed it again and approved it this time with a bit of clean up to go with it. You can find the article here: Gary M. Feinman. -Aaron Booth (talk) 05:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Pleasure working with you. Kingh81 (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Jason McLennan page

Hi Aaron.

Hey there. I have twice submitted a page for Jason McLennan, CEO of the International Living Future Institute, creator of the Living Building Challenge, international speaker. The reviewer says I have failed to properly cite the page. I've added more links and citations, and am not terribly clear how to proceed. Are there specific sections that need attribution? Are they questioning Jason's legitimacy for a page? His work is referenced elsewhere on Wikipedia pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_building_challenge and he has been profiled or mentioned on NPR, in the NYT, the Guardian, Outside magazine, Metropolis magazine (a Wall Street Journal publication, Time Magazine. I thought I had referenced most of those, but if not, is this the type of citation you seek? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbmcommunications (talk • contribs) 16:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Part of this has to do with formatting citations. For help on inline citations, refer to WP:CITEFOOT. There is also a tool in the edit window under "Cite" and then there is a drop down box entitled "templates." Also, when citing a book, make sure to include the ISBN number whenever possible.

The article also needs to be broken down into sections using level 2 "==" headers.

-Aaron Booth (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Aaron.

When I submitted this time around, the review and subsequent rejection was instantaneous. I'm curious how that happened. But more importantly, I did use the templates provided and am uncertain where exactly I am in error now, or if there was a glitch with the submission and it was not actually reviewed. I received the rejection the moment I saved the page, rather than the submission acknowledgement message I received the previous times. Despite the templates, there do appear to be some funny links on the page, and I will correct those now and see if they address the problem. But I am hoping you can help me out if further editing is necessary beyond that. Thanks in advance for your time and effort.

Gbmcommunications (talk) 19:46, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the article's history, it shows that you never resubmitted it. On a side note it also appears that you have been blocked on Wikipedia due to a Username violation. -Aaron Booth (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Winningindians

Hi Aaron booth

I have created the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jorg_Janke and in the review they mentioned that the person Jorg Janke is not notable,Jorg Janke is the founder and who developed the [compiere] [ERP], Then why they commented as that person is not notable.

Thanks, Winningindians — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winningindians (talk • contribs) 00:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

At this time the article has no inline citations. Without these it is difficult to tell where the information provided is coming from, much less to determine if the individual is notable under Wikipedia's guidelines. For inline citations, refer to WP:CITEFOOT for help here. There is also a tool in the edit window under "Cite" and then there is a drop down box entitled "templates." Also, when citing a book, make sure to include the ISBN number whenever possible. -Aaron Booth (talk) 03:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

New Page submission, [Mac Arnold] by Stansun

Hello Aaron Booth, Thank you for your feedback on my new page submission, [Mac Arnold]. I have added notability information as suggested in Wikipedia guidelines. Please let me know if I am on the right track to improving to a level that will be accepted. And please be patient with me, I am a first timer at all of this. Stansun Stansun (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I went back and did some clean up of the article and then approved and moved it to the main article space. it still needs some work, cleanup, and particularly more citations, but this is a good start. -Aaron Booth (talk) 03:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Aaron Booth, Thank you for your support and for moving my submission into the main article space. I will continue to improve it and would welcome your feedback in the future. Stansun Stansun (talk) 01:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Help with submission

Hello Aaron. I thank you for reviewing my artcle for creation Hogar Nueva Granada. Since I am new at this, could you let me know specifically what you think was inappropriate so I can adress it? The article is Fundacion Hogar Nueva Granada Thank you --LilliK 12:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LilliKass (talk • contribs)

The primary of concern has to do with nuetral point of view, and that the article reads more like an advertisement. See WP:NPOV, WP:NOTPROMOTION, and WP:ARTSPAM. -Aaron Booth (talk) 05:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Canadian_Arthritis_Network

Hi,

I'm the creator for this article, I also work for this organization (non-governmental, not for profit, research organization) and we purposefully did (what you call copyright violation) because our web server is going down as our organization is sunsetting. As such, the website, the content will change. I can authorize the permission from a managing director of the organization if I can somehow email that to you.

Thanks Ajay Bhargava Content Developer Canadian Arthritis Network — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.113.236.183 (talk) 01:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Here:

":For text, you can send an email, ideally using the language from the template at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries:

(1) From an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org;

(2) After sending the email, place {{OTRS pending}} on the article's talk page.

Someone will reply to your email, indicating whether the content and your license is acceptable and update the page to indicate that the confirmation of the license has been received."

-Aaron Booth (talk) 02:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

War against war article

I don't understand why you conclude the article is a neologism. I provided you with many reliable published third party sources demonstrating otherwise. You not knowing of the subject does not imply it is a neologism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.151.165.45 (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Under WP:NEOLOGISM:

" To support an article about a particular term or concept we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term. An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs, books, and articles that use the term rather than are about the term) are insufficient to support articles on neologisms because this may require analysis and synthesis of primary source material to advance a position, which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy."

-Aaron Booth (talk) 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

which is exactly what I have provided: Aberkane's article is the most comprehensive description and study of the concept that can be found today. Goldstein's study is also an excellent compendium of the scholarly outpout on the concept. You must submit your decision to a serious quorum of experts, not decide alone what is a neologism and what is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.20.20 (talk) 13:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

the article as all but been approved on the French wikipedia 89.247.133.88 (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The article seems best suited for inclusion in the main article Anti-war movement if anywhere. Wikipedia generally does not have articles on words or phrases with some exceptions, those exceptions are however not the rule. Not every coined phrase or term is considered notable. -Aaron Booth (talk) 18:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Article of auleadership

Hello, I have submitted my article now 5 times, editing each time to meet another editor's view. I have seen other articles that are much smaller and worst then mine, with just 1 reference, and they are in Wikipedia, so I feel disrmined against at this point and very frustrated. Please help me out, the article is its smallest possible content now, I took off a lot of it already, I don't understand why it should be a list. The references are very good, I had even to look in books to find one. I will wait on your help. Thank youAULeadership (talk) 06:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I just did quite a bit of clean up on the article, and then went ahead and moved it. See Talk:American University of Leadership for explanation. -Aaron Booth (talk) 17:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/European_Network_for_Accreditation_of_Engineering_Education

Hello Aaron! Thanks for reviewing my article - I just wanted to know what part is a copyright issue? Is it the authorisation process? Can I just delete this and re-submit? Sorry but I need help as my article keeps getting declined! Thanks for any advice you can give me - it is MUCH appreciated. AISBL AISBL (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

When Reviewing the article, I found that parts of it, particularly in the History section were identical to some of the text at [1]. I just went back and re checked a couple other random lines in the article and I can't find any other Copyvio problems so I restored all but the section where I found the violating text. You can re-write that section and resubmit the article if you would like. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education

-Aaron Booth (talk) 18:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Aaron - thanks for the feedback - I have now deleted the section and I think I have re-submitted it - I can't seem to get back to the page where it says click here to re-submit....if I have got this wrong could you please direct me to where it should be? Thanks so much - as this is the 6th time I have submitted it I hope it will now be correct! AISBL AISBL (talk) 09:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Pluck_(string_trio)

Thanks for the review, Aaron. This was my first new article on Wikipedia, so it's good to get some feedback. My source was actually http://www.pluck.me.uk/update/biog.html. I thought I'd changed the text enough, but I was obviously guilty of close paraphrasing, especially in the "History" section. However, a lot of the article was my own work. I'll try to rewrite it when I have time... Djbbean (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Boston Patent Law Association

Hi Aaron, Thank you for reviewing my article. I submitted the article for review about a week ago and another reviewer requested that I add references. I added a number of references and did not change any content.

I am confused by your characterization of the work as containing copyrighted material. The interview that you site is an interview with a previous president of the Boston Patent Law Association (who is listed in my article in the table of past presidents) and discusses the organization, but it has no text present within the article that I wrote. That is, no content was taken from this interview and placed into my article. If there is a specific portion of the draft page that you believe is problematic, please let me know which portion. While nothing in the article I submitted was taken from the document you cited, in the interest of getting my article published, I’ll consider removing or revising the text you view as being problematic.

Also, I put a considerable effort into adding references to the article I submitted, but the page containing those references is now gone. Can you please restore this so that I can edit it?

I think you can agree from reading my article that the Boston Patent Law Association is a significant bar association with a long history, and worthy of a Wikipedia article. I welcome any additional feedback you may have regarding how to get my article published.

Thank you, Elizabeth Ecummings5 (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually parts of the article were copied and pasted from a variety of different sources. For example the first sentence is a direct copy from here. The Edwards Wildman link only contained a line that was copied from the Mission sentence.

I can go through and restore some of the article, however I cannot under no circumstances restore any violating text. Also as a note: don't place external links in the body of the article. Citations should never be place in article headers, always inline where it is citing specific statements.

-Aaron Booth (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Aaron, Please restore the portions of the article that you do not believe are problematic so that I may rewrite the remaining sections. I am happy to correct the formatting (citations in article headers etc.) as per your request as well. Thanks,Ecummings5 (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Already done -Aaron Booth (talk) 20:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

[Jorge Grundman] page

Hi Aaron:

Thanks for the review of Jorge Grundman composer page I have created. Following your suggestions, I have changed everything to not violate any copyright. Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkmsclg (talk • contribs) 16:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

PAGEANT DOCUMENTARY

if you have a chance, if you could look at what I've updated, would be most grateful

Bonchic (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)bonchicBonchic (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

[May I Hebb Your Attention Pliss]:article for creation

I think i have cited ample "published sources that are reliable and independent"on the page for it to be created as a stub.I dont think there can be better ,reliable and independent references but still..........help will be accepted gleefully.Thanks[[User talk:ayanosh|T]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/ayanosh|M]] (talk) 05:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC)ayanosh

Help about Jorge Grundman article

Hi Aaron:

I hope I have removed what you can think it is a copyright violation. Would you be so kind to specify if you think there is more pending? Thanks in advance. I wish to finish this article to write more but as I am new here I am a little lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkmsclg (talk • contribs) 08:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Article Writing Tips

Aaron,

First off, thank you for taking the time to review my article. I am really new to this but am making all attempts to learn. You recently reviewd this article and I just wanted to pick your brain about your comments a bit. Is there a rule of thumb for how many independent sources confirm notability? I'm sure there is no hard and fast rule, but I am trying to keep it as neutral as possible. Any input you have would be more than appreciated.

Thank you!

Ddoonie (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

It is really less about the number of sources as it is what the sources are, how in depth they cover the subject, how they cover the subject, the way the article is written, etc.

From WP:CORP

The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple[1] independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability.

Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization. Acceptable sources under this criterion include all types of reliable sources except works carrying merely trivial coverage, such as:

• sources that simply report meeting times, shopping hours or event schedules,
• the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories,
• inclusion in lists of similar organizations,
• the season schedule or final score from sporting events,
• routine communiqués announcing such matters as the hiring or departure of personnel,
• brief announcements of mergers or sales of part of the business,
• simple statements that a product line is being sold, changed, or discontinued,
• routine notices of facility openings or closings (e.g., closure for a holiday or the end of the regular season),
• routine notices of the opening or closing of local branches, franchises, or shops,
• routine restaurant reviews,
• quotations from an organization's personnel as story sources, or
• passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization.

The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary.

-Aaron Booth (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Blasted, that was quick! That fellow must be living on caffeine! Thanks for your assistance. Have a cup! Antonio AntonioRusconi (talk) 01:29, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

HopeNet - Social Evolution Platform ‎

HopeNet - Social Evolution Platform Thank you for reviewing my article that I have been desperately trying to get published. Can you help me understand why it doesn't meet notability criteria? HopeNet is a platform which is being used to transform the educational system in the Philippines. The U.S. Military is reviewing the platform to determine if it can be used in Iraq, Southeast Asia and even the United States in disadvantaged communities where standard educational practices are failing. My confusion lies in that an artcle for World Changers Academy in South Africa has been published and the fundamentals discussed are similar, yet without the technology of HopeNet. Your feedback is very much appreciated. Thanks — GTwiki2012 (talk) 00:43, 26 March 2012 (UTC) Preceding unsigned comment added by GTwiki2012 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Monden

Hi Aaron, can you help me get my article Monden approved with some guidance and specifics. I have provided a biography link from a third party website, a coverage following the release of first album (which became a bestseller; on Serbian) and a link to the official fan page. This is my first article so help would be very appreciated. I can provide links to Monden's songs on YouTube, clips with hundreds of thousands of views (I believe that's notable), also I can provide links to online fliers (posted by different organizations) announcing drum and bass parties with Monden as a headliner. Your help will be much appreciated. Thank you. (Illopps (talk) 02:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC))

Hans G. Conrad

Dear Aaron: Thank you very much for your review. I‘m very sorry, but I don‘t understand the notification at the end of the page: »Cite error: There are ref tags on this page, but the references will not show without a Reflist template or a references tag; see the help page.« I have tried to identify my mistake and visited the recommended help site but I still can‘t find the point where I made something wrong. Can you please give me a hint so I can learn the correct process? Thank you very much for your help! Best regards from Germany Rene M Spitz (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The problem was that you had a ref tag after the reflist template on the page. I fixed the formatting on the problematic link as well as some other formatting things on the page. The notification is now gone. -Aaron Booth (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much again for your help, Aaron! Rene M Spitz (talk) 14:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry Klarberg

What's steps do I need to take in order to establish that Barry Klarberg is a notable person sufficient for a Wikipedia page? He is the newest owner of the New York Yankees (with independent sources to establish reliability and validity - i.e. the official 2012 New York Yankees Media Guide; to be released to the public in May 2012), and he is the manager for several celebrities including Charlie Sheen, Justin Timberlake, Anna Kournikova, amongst several others.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry Klarberg  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rklarberg (talk • contribs) 23:43, 26 March 2012 (UTC) 

Review for Istaroxime

Hi Aaron, thank you for taking the time to review my article. I don't understand why "This submission doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Istaroxime_(PST2744) This is a novel drug that is looked to be used to treat heart failure and all sources are primarily journal articles and a reliable textbook. Thanks for your help.75.119.230.193 (talk) 01:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Do not understand article rejection

Hello, I created the SkyFiber article, and modeled it after several other articles of similar small telecom companies. We have more information in ours than several of these (example Bullseye Telecom), these have been allowed as articles, and yet you rejected ours? Please explain what is different about Bullseye's article from ours — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyfiberinc (talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Mike Morin

Dear Aaron,

I'm hoping you can help me further to get approval of my article. Mike Morin has played ice hockey in Germany at a the professional level. He is the the all-time leading scorer for the ERSC Amberg team, which is over 60 years old. I know this should be mentioned in my article, and maybe that's what is required to get approval. He has won awards throughout the years, ie. Rookie Of The Year with Saskatoon Blades, WHL.

Your advice will be much appreciated as this man is truely notable and worthy of an esteemed wikipedia entry.

Thank you for help.

Abstauber (talk) 19:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Article Submission: Women's Audio Mission

Hi Aaron, I recently submitted an article on the Women's Audio Mission, Women's Audio Mission, for inclusion on Wikipedia which was declined because it did not "sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject." Would it be possible to get some more information about what would need to be added to an article on the organization to allow it to qualify? Was it primarily an issue of needing more published sources on the organization or a problem with the description of the organization or both? The Women's Audio Mission is a non-commercial organization the scope of whose work is both national and international and eight articles from third party, independent, verifiable sources from the audio professional and national news media were cited in the article. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! --Glumbumthegreat (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Dvora_Bochman

I would like to thank you for taking time to review the above article. Based on your input it has been fixed by another more experinced editor. As a courtesy, I'm updating you that the article will be moving to MainSpace. I am also humbly requesting as a noob that you put at least one inline tag for each type of problem you notice in the articles you review so that inexperienced editors such as myself will be able to make headway implementing your advice. (The problem being that the guidelines linked in the infobox are broad difficult to interpret). OrenBochman (talk) 10:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for reviewing my first glam article. OrenBochman (talk) 10:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Agata Tuszynska - problems with posting a text

Hi, with ref. to her bio you said ISBN are needed in the bibliography section. Do you mean ISBN for books where she is mentioned listed under biblio or for books that she wrote, listed under trasnlations (as well as in the body of the text). It is not clear. best, AS Biuroat (talk) 11:19, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

When using an book to cite information in the article, use the ISBN of that book, and cite that information inline in a < ref> tag just as citing any other type of source.

Also using the ISBN when listing the books that she wrote may be helpful for anyone looking for them, however by no means is this mandatory.

-Aaron Booth (talk) 21:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Arturo G Alvarez

Hi, Aaron.

You had taken down my redirects to arturo g alvarez´s page from the names Arturo Garcia Alvarez and Arturo Alvarez international music producer. He has often been cited under both these names so i thought it would be best to redirect them to the right page. Why are the redirections not good? Was it my format, or do you think it´s not necessary? PLease advice.

My best,

Ellathecat (talk) 02:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that you are redirecting to/from non-existent pages. The directs say that article "x" redirects here, when in fact it does not. And, "for other uses see: 'y'" when "y" also does not exist. -Aaron Booth (talk) 02:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Compliment

Just wanted to compliment you on upholding WP:TONE and WP:NPOV standards, particularly regarding "Reception" hyperbole, at Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2. Additionally, the newly registered User:BrookDavid, whose multiple accounts you noted are listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fluffymoose, tried again to add trivial, non-notable awards to the already large awards chart. Thanks from one peer to another for keeping it an encyclopedia article and not a free fan site. With regards, Tenebrae (talk) 22:56, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Webb, Stokes and Sparks Wikipedia Page Feedback

Aaron: Thank you for your feedback on the Wikipedia page I submitted for Webb, Stokes and Sparks, a personal injury law firm. I plan to make edits to it based on your comments, but had a few questions.

1) You had mentioned using more credible sources. For example, if four of the lawyers were included in the list for the 2011 Texas Super Lawyers, and I cite the page on the Super Lawyers website where this can be found, is that not sufficient?

2) Would it help if I was able to show that the partners have taken on and won cases which have made a significant impact in their community or to change/amend an unjust law? Or if they've held government offices or written books? I'm just trying to get a feel for what would be considered significant enough to get them included in Wikipedia.

3) Should I eliminate the section about their individual accomplishments? I was wondering if that part came off more as too much self-promotion.

Thank you for all you input and advice, greatly appreciate it!

Best Regards, Kristin — Preceding unsigned comment added by KDavisMA2012 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Webb, Stokes and Sparks Wikipedia Page Feedback

Aaron: Thank you for your feedback on the Wikipedia page I submitted for Webb, Stokes and Sparks, a personal injury law firm. I plan to make edits to it based on your comments, but had a few questions.

1) You had mentioned using more credible sources. For example, if four of the lawyers were included in the list for the 2011 Texas Super Lawyers, and I cite the page on the Super Lawyers website where this can be found, is that not sufficient?

2) Would it help if I was able to show that the partners have taken on and won cases which have made a significant impact in their community or to change/amend an unjust law? Or if they've held government offices or written books? I'm just trying to get a feel for what would be considered significant enough to get them included in Wikipedia.

3) Should I eliminate the section about their individual accomplishments? I was wondering if that part came off more as too much self-promotion.

Thank you for all you input and advice, greatly appreciate it!

Best Regards, Kristin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Webb,_Stokes_and_Sparks — Preceding unsigned comment added by KDavisMA2012 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not Aaron Booth

the IP detection system seems a biy iffy. I'm not aaron booth (nor a wiki contributor) so a bit puzzled why I should be identified as AB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.128.140 (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to? -Aaron Booth (talk) 19:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Biljana Ciric

Hello, I have created a wikipedia entry for the shanghai-based curator biljana ciric which was declined. i have spent considerable time in asia and ciric is well known and respected in the asian art community. i was actually surprised she did not have an entry so far. it would be great if you could let me know what else there is to do to make this work. thanks very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ouijayes (talk • contribs) 15:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Rejection of my article: "Facets of God's Creation: revealed for the seekers of Truth."

I understand that my article has been rejected by you for serious copyright violation. But I could not understand how did I violate it. My article is based primarily on two universally acclaimed books of Revelation: The Bible and The Qur'an. Please let me know if I bring out some selected verses from these scriptures -- is it becoming a copyright violation? Last twenty years I have been contemplating of 'words of God', traveled different countries to learn their languages, and written many similar articles and two books - not for making truth, but for seeking it. In case there are other reasons, please let me know it - so that I can amend my errors.

At the end of article I have quoted Al ghazali, if this is a violation, I shall try to get permission from concrned authority or delete it from the article.

(Partha ranjan Palodhi (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC))

I don't remember the exact source that text was copied from off the top of my head, and regardless at this point it will have to wait review by an administrator or OTRS volunteer. That being said, even without possessing a copyright violation, the article would have been declined as WP:ESSAY, WP:NOR, WP:SOAP, and WP:BATTLEGROUND just to name a few. -Aaron Booth (talk) 04:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

The Tolerance, Equality, and Awareness Movement

Can you please tell me why our page wasn't approved. The page is "The Tolerance, Equality, and Awareness Movement." We are a reputable organization that has received international attention. Our organization has been written about in the Associated Press. I have been communicating with several people in the Live Help section and they have been very helpful. I was told that our page would be one that would be likely to be approved based on the changes that I have made. I have 13 sources citing it. Can you please approve our page or tell me what changes need to be made? Thank You. Teamwmi Teamwmi (talk) 05:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Importance of the article

Hello Aaron, I've got a review from you at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Vladimir_Arenev about the topic being unimportant. I am a Ukrainian and you know, we have a literature in here too. This fantasy author is as important as his colleagues, e.g. Maryna and Serhiy Dyachenko, or H. L. Oldie, or any other. At least I've provided the page with much better list of references that the authors of those two articles about Ukrainian fantasy writers. Not that lot of Ukrainians know English, so we are not that active contributors to the global Wiki, but we still want to share our info globally. I would highly appreciate your suggestions on how to make the subject of the article more important. I thought that 16 solo books and being actively writing for 15 years makes this person worth being noticed at Wikipedia. At least all this facts are at Ukrainian Wiki page. with regards, Ajaksus (talk) 19:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Article Decline

Hi Aaron!

I would really appreciate your help with the article you've just declined.

I have created two articles before and they weren't declined, while having much less references.

Most of the references i've used on the article (for Sasha Raskin) are from major blogs / music news sites that reviewed the music across the world.

Please help me to finish the work on this article, I've spent many many hours of work on it.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homerhmr40 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Homerhmr40 (talk) 08:20, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Without going back to look at the article at the moment, I can tell you right off the bat that the use of Blogs as references are, the vast majority of the time, unacceptable as a reliable source. There are generally very few exceptions. It is not a matter of having a bunch of references. What matters is how in depth the sources are (ie. not a brief mention in a list, or a passing reference in an article), where the source was published (ie. new york times, Billboard, trade papers, etc.), and whether or not these sources support claims of notability within the AFC submission, or any article in the main space for that matter. I just finished up at the theatre for the morning, have a class, rehearsal, and a couple meetings, and then I will try to take a another closer look at the article sometime this evening. -Aaron Booth (talk) 17:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, in regards to the eight references you have in the first sentence of the lead section, you will want to refer to WP:MASK. -Aaron Booth (talk) 01:18, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I looked over the article again (you also need to fill out sources completely rather than using merely bare URLS). The article really posses primarily unreliable sources and sources that do not give much in depth coverage to the subject. A few of the sources are primary and do not establish notability, and are questionable when citing information and should be removed. Blogs should not be cited unless it is published by an established expert in the field or a reported for a reputable news organization per WP:IRS. Facebook should also not be cited. At this point this article really lacks much as far as establishing notability. Also phrases such as "gained worldwide recognition with his" should not be used. -Aaron Booth (talk) 01:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Aron thank you once again for the help. I will make the correct changes, and will try to locate more reliable sources. The time you've spent by going through the article again is not taken for granted. - Homerhmr40 —Preceding undated comment added 14:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC).

new submission on Agata Tuszynska

Hi, over a week ago I made some changes to the text. I'd like to know when will it be reviewed. Thanks. Biuroat (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Have you re-submitted it yet for review? -Aaron Booth (talk) 17:51, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

yes Biuroat (talk) 04:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

There currently is no waiting for review template on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Agata Tuszynska -Aaron Booth (talk) 04:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Saccade

Hello, I was just wondering why my submission for saccade was refused. The band's music has been featured on TV, They have been reviewed in established Irish music publications like the Irish Times and Hot Press and have been featured on the TG4 show Deis Roc, All the information is cited so even if the article was submitted as a stub that would be great. Please give me any more information if there's something I should change to help it be accepted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Saccade_(band)

Lorcanmce (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)LorcanmceLorcanmce (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Mexican drug cartel propaganda page

Thank you for your review and edit of this page Mexican Drug Cartel Propaganda. However, in regards to its decline I think this subject would be better suited as a separate page because this goes far beyond just the war on drugs. Yes, it is occuring during the so-called "War on Drugs" but the activities discuss in this article would be still occuring absent of the label "war of drugs." That label is political. This subject is a broader subject that would be best emphasized in a seperate piece and not buried within another page. Thank you again for your review. And I look forward to anymore feedback on the matter.

CeceliaXIV (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)CeceliaXIV

I agree this should be a separate page.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

review of article for submission - questions and guidance

Hi Aaron, thanks for reviewing my article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Australian Paralympic Swim Team. I'm quite new to wikipedia so I'm hoping you can help me with what I need to do to bring my article in line with the Wikipedia requirements. In terms of the copyright, I'm not sure which part of the article doesn't comply - are you able to help me with this or point me in the right direction? Thank you Melissa Carlton (talk) 12:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissa Carlton (talk • contribs) 11:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Folkstreams Page

Hi,

I'm just wondering what I need to do to get my page approved? I've been working on it for almost two months now and whenever I submit the page I only receive the standard, generic comments about the page. I completely rewrote the page to make it less like an advertisement, and yet that's the only feedback I received. I've added references to legitimate sources like NPR, the University of Oregon, and the University of North Carolina, as well as removing links to specific films featured on Folkstreams. What I could really use is some more down-to-earth advice about what I can do and what specifically needs to be fixed to get the page approved. I appreciate any help or suggestions that you might have for me. Holl!12 (talk) 15:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

My submission on ecotherapy

Dear reviewer, thank you for your comments on my ecotherapy submission. You suggest that this article is too short for an entry and that I should amalgamate my submission with the existing article on 'ecotherapy'. Such article doesn't exist and ecotherapy is only mentioned in passing under the article titled 'ecopsychology'. I am known in the international academic and research world for having developed and defined 'contemporary ecotherapy' which does no longer pertain to ecopsychology but is clearly and scientifically placed in the new framework of ECOHEALTH. However 'contemporary ecotherapy is a distinct and scientifically researched subject of its own and deserves an article of its own based on my PhD original research. I would welcome your response Kind regards 212.225.115.254 (talk) 19:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Ambra Burls PhD

about copywriting

Hello Aaron. Thank you for reviewing my submission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/BookBox

I work for BookBox and we all worked together for the submission to have the Same Language Subtitle discussed, just to confirm, what I'd have to do to have it publish is to write a new overview about the concept?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamcbem (talk • contribs) 06:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The easiest, and quickest way would, yes, be to just re-write it. However, the other option would be to get permission for Wikipedia so the infringing text can be used: Wikipedia:Confirmation_of_permission#Confirmed. -Aaron Booth (talk) 06:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Aaron. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamcbem (talk • contribs) 05:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Milind Sheorey

Hi Aaron,

I refer to your rejection of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Milind_Sheorey

I don't know if you're familiar with the Indian classical music turf, but it is one of the least publicised and poorly documented genres of music. While there is remarkable interest in studying it, there is only a handful of scholarly papers/books published on the subject and invariably these papers/books are not up to date. I, as a connoiseu and a serious student of Indian classical music, would like to write on the musicians snd intruments who/which form a part of the evolution process of this genre of music. I'd like to know if I must continue this exercise or just back out since I would be hard-pressed to find sources that strictly fall within the Wikipedia prescription even to cite the greatest luminaries of Indian classical music. Do feel free to visit some of the pages on Indian classical artists to verify my claim that there are next to no entries which cite scholarly sources.

Do let me know why the sources cited by me for 'Milind Sheorey' are unauthentic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragahemant (talk • contribs) 08:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Scholarly sources, in the common use among academics, are not necessarily mandatory for establishing notability on Wikipedia. Of course, they are helpful, and whenever found are by far the most reliable source of information. There are, however, a varity of other sources out there are are just as acceptable for Wikipedia. The types of sources, however, that do not establish notability, and should be used rarely, if ever, when citing information, include:

• Social Network Sites such as Linkedin, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, etc
• Youtube. Unless the source is, for example, the official channel of ABC news or some other organization of that high profile nature. Also with Youtube, you need to be careful as much of the content on there is in some way a copyright violation, and cannot be linked on Wikipedia for any reason.
• Websites written by the subject, the subjects management/representation, or other individuals closely associated with the subject either professionally or personally.
• Blogs (unless they are written by an established authority in the field. For example, PZ Meyers has a blog that could be cited on topics where it may be relevant. He has a PHD in Biology and is a recognized figure in his field. So under-circumstances such as that, there are exceptions. If you want to use a blog, look up who the author is. And if that authorship can be verified.
• Fan Sites
• Sites such as IMDb which are primarily user generated
• Sites that a marketing sites, or sites that primarily serve to sell a product. For example: iTunes, Amazon, etc.

Also, the sources should deal with the subject in depth. They should, for example, not be a passing reference, or a mere inclusion in a list of similar artists, such as a directory. Regardless of where that directory is published.

The sources also need to verify the information in the text. The sources cannot simply be placed in the article to WP:MASK, or soley to attempt to establish notability without verifying the content of the article. The article itself should establish notability, with the sources verifying that notability. See WP:MUSICBIO.

You may also find it fruitful to look through sources in Hindi for example. Sources do not necessarily have to be in English (however if an English equivalent exist, use the English equivalent since it is always helpful to keep the references in the same language as the article for clarity. However having references in English are by no means mandatory). -Aaron Booth (talk) 16:37, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Mean field games

Dear Aaron,

I don't understand why you declined the article on mean field games:

1) it's a new area of research with publications by notable mathematicians, in case you don't know Pierre Louis Lions is a Fields Medalist, the equivalent to the Nobel prize for mathematics

2) It's the subject of a course at College de France by Pierre Louis Lions in the last 4 years

3) several conferences on the suject have been organized

4) there are proper references on peer reviewed scientific journals

5) though I have published papers on the subject, I'm not citing myself.

In any case, if I can improve the article in any way, please let me know.

Thanks. D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlcvag (talk • contribs) 16:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The initial problem has to do with the fact the the only references are those written by the individuals that coined the term or began this field of research. Are there references out there by other scholars in the field? If there are please cite them.

Also, notability is not inherited. Just because someone associated with the topic is notable (which the subjects mentioned may or may not be under Wikipedia standards), does not mean that the topic is itself also notable.

The article would also benefit from expansion on the subject. Giving more explanation and possible figures, tables, examples, images, etc. As well as writings from others in the field about the topic. Wikipedia requires there to be references that come from a third party. -Aaron Booth (talk) 18:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Salt Lake County Jail

Hello.

I have noticed that you have declined my submission as a copyright violation. That is one of the things that I try best to refrain from doing. Yes, the wording is similar, but it is not the same as the original page, if you take a closer glance.

Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do, and if you believe that it should be paraphrased further.

Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 20:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: Discussed this matter over IRC. Will be looking into other sources, since it was said to be unencyclopedic as well, and paraphrase the article more per the discussion. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 22:08, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

First article Lissa Lauria

Hey Aaron, I'm just not clear on what more is needed to verify. I've gone through so many other pages trying to understand that I got names from some of this young lady's peers that are on Wikipedia and there isn't even half of the links that I attached. I have the NY Times article, the Weeds website and other sites verifying what I wrote was true and many, many more. I'm not connected with any of those sites and other than the personal pages I put at the bottom, there was nothing that Ms. Lauria put up herself I'm sure. Can you help me with what I'm missing? I added so many links and verifications, like I said. I really appreciate any and all advice you can give me. Thanks! Have a good one. MusicMan865 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MusicMan865 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

On second look, there appears to have been multiple miss-formatted ref tags. Those caused only part of the first line of the article and nothing else to be visible to me when I viewed the article initially. I am going to go back into the article and clean that stuff up, so i can take a look at the full article sometime this evening.

I went through the article and fixed the ref tag problems (see the format of the ref tags now for how this is done). I also went through and removed sources that were either copyright violations, unreliable sources, or failed verification. (As well as a couple minor formatting fixes)

The article at this time is in need of more sources. There are really only two strong reliable sources (NYT and Calhoun Times). The Newswire reference does not establish notability in that it appears to be a press release written by her representation. It can be used to cite where she was born (as you have it doing), however that is about it. You should also if at all possible find a better reference than the "Bonnie Gillespie Resume" as well. Much of the article still remains unsourced.

There are also a few grammar errors that need to be corrected as well. -Aaron Booth (talk) 00:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I went back and found other sources and fixed grammar, etc. Much of what she has done is proven to be on websites as you can see. Hope this works this time! I'm excited to start another! MusicMan865 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MusicMan865 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure how this works, but I once again fixed grammar and added more sources. I'm not sure if this is being reviewed again. And actually not sure how to even sign here. So sorry. I'll get it eventually. MM — Preceding unsigned comment added by MusicMan865 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

40 Lipe page

Hi Aaron,

The wiki page I created for Mike Lipe was my first attempt at this and thought I had included enough references to be above board. Maybe it reads too much as an advertisement still? In any case, appreciate your assistance in what I can do to edit the page so it does meet the guidelines for posting on Wikipedia and I can get all of the "flags" removed from the sight.

Thanks in advance,

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoe10 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well the immediate problem right now is that there are no references at all on the page. See WP:BIO. -Aaron Booth (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello

hi i only submit hte articles, like Matt's, Mikeys, Ray's etc but I feel as if we should give them a shot Ericdeaththe2nd (talk) 20:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)ericdeaththe2ndEricdeaththe2nd (talk) 20:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Images & Voices of Hope

I'm writing to ask a reconsideration of the current submission for Images & Voices of Hope. I am simply trying to help here.

If I understand correctly, the problem sourcing and the matter of notability.

The brief submission attempts to do no more than state the organization's existence and its mission. The references for this include a link to the Dallas Morning News regarding a typical meeting of the IVOH group, a short documentary from Al Gore's Current organization, a listing from an established major event-planning company describing an IVOH event, and a videotaped presentation by a top executive of the Ogilvy Mather agency presenting at an IVOH event.

I have now added a report from WLNR Public Television, along with a video on IVOH featuring a number of noted media professionals, including Roberta Baskin, whose personal Wikipedia entry, I notice, includes her position on the board of IVOH.

The one sticking point I can see is the quotation from the organization's executive director. I obtained this independently for the submission when I took interest. So I am the source. My credentials, such as they are, include 32 years as a reporter and columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times (byline: Zay N. Smith) who has worked, aside from this, with fact checkers at a number of top organizations including Random House. I mention this only to say that I am not a stranger to the rigors of sourcing matters to put in print. If this is not sufficient, the quotation, of course, can go, although that would be regrettable.

As for notability, the organization is important within my profession but not yet an organization that is a household word. As such, the list of available references is not crowded (although there seem to be dozens of blogs that have something to say about the organization). I would submit that, for the purpose of this brief entry, the inclusion of some of the notable names at the most recent summit demonstrates that this is a serious organization of sufficient note for inclusion.

Again, the submission does nothing more than state the existence of an organization and its mission.

I really think the sourcing is more than adequate to underpin this modest effort, and I hope you can reconsider so that Wikipedia can fill this gap in its articles.

Thanks. Zay Smith.

Nortythebartender (talk) 22:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The article at this time only has one reliable source. And that source actually comes from the examiner which is on the Wikipedia blacklist and cannot be linked (it is not acceptable as a source). Dallas news only has the first couple lines of the article. There are also no in line citations in the article. You mention there are blogs, however I will tell you right now before you go through the trouble of including them that they are unreliable sources. We don't cite blogs. -Aaron Booth (talk) 00:45, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Images & Voices of Hope 2

I want to assure you I never for a moment considered personal blogs as a source. I cited them in my note only to point out that the notability of the organization IVOH is such that it has attracted fairly wide attention on the blogosphere.

I have reorganized a bit and eliminated the Dallas Morning News link, as you requestd, and a link that was largely redundant with another.

I have added other references. What you have now are:

1. The organization's Web site in which the organization states its own mission. I think it fair to say that there is no more reliable source for an organization's mission statement than the organization's mission statement.

2. A documentary from WLNR Public TV News descriptive of the mission and notability of IVOH and featuring identifiable and often highly notable members of the professional media (unless PBS is not to be considered a reliable source).

3. A video of an IVOH speech by the highly identifiable Richard Hemingway, a major executive at the Ogilvy & Mather international advertising and public relations agency indicative of the kind of presentations IVOH sponsors at its meetings and summits.

4. A news story about a major newspaper editor being honored by IVOH.

5. A news column item by Robert Feder, media columnist of the Chicago Sun-Times for more than 20 years who is now writing his column at an Internet site. The sixth item announces the appointment of the new IVOH executive director.

6. A Wikipedia entry on TV reporter Roberta Baskin, which notes that she is a board member of IVOH (I am hoping that Wikipedia considers Wikipedia a reliable source).

7. An item form the Robert R. McCormick Foundation Journalism Program regarding a major program co-sponsored by IVOH. Because IVOH is not AARP or UNESCO, I kept the submission brief. The submission basically states only its existence and describes its basic mission. As I said in my previous note, I have dealt with information and its verification my entire professional life, and I am considered pretty good at it.

I think this modest and noncontroversial submission is now almost over-sourced, but one can never have too many sources, I guess.

I have no connection with IVOH. I ran across the gap in Wikipedia while researching something else. As I did when I noticed the gap some months ago on journalist Roger Simon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Simon_(journalist)), I decided to help out, writing and submitting an item.

As I say, I am only trying to help out, on my own time, but am starting to feel as if I am getting the back of the hand. I hope we can resolve this soon. It has taken up too much of my time, and yours.

Zay Smith Nortythebartender (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2012 (UTC)