Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 July 17
If anyone has additional information or sources, please let me know. <contact details removed> ~~Cherl Harrison (talk) 01:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
-
- Good article, but consider adding something like an infobox to the article. Chevymontecarlo 08:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Just making a page for the first expansion to Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty and was hoping for some feedback.
woolysockofdoom (talk) 03:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Pretty good, but you should add more reliable third party refernces from television, big websites, newspapers, ect. to prove it's notability (its importance to be included in an encyclopedia) and it is also missing categories. Good job though! - would you like me to move it to mainspace for you ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 17:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Cryptozoology needs a second opinion on whether it is ready to be considered for A or even GA class status. We would also like more editors who are familiar with the topic to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Cryptozoology. ~~Gniniv (talk) 06:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
-
- A-class is actually a higher standard than GA, confusing as that may be. Stub. Start, C, B, GA, A, FA.
- The article generally looks in good shape; I noticed a couple of 'bare' references that need {{citation}} templates, and some parts unreferenced (some tagged as such). References are the critical thing,
- There is information in the lede that is not in the body text (e.g. phantom cats and John Wall); the lede needs to summarize the whole article, and cannot have any facts that are not stated (and usually elaborated upon) within the body.
- cryptozoologists should not be in bold, except at the very beginning.
- 'Further reading' would benefit from ISBN numbers
- Be wary of plagiarism; it is hard to tell - without checking out the history in detail - but some google matches for exact phrases in quotes might be troubling, e.g. "folktales can have small grains of truth and important information regarding undiscovered organisms" - possibly all those references copied from Wikipedia? But otherwise, any direct quoted text must be in quotation marks, and referenced.
- Getting an article up to GA-level is somewhat beyond the remit of 'Requests for feedback'; I suggest the following;
- Check it against User:Ealdgyth/GA review cheatsheet - there are a lot of nit-picky things there, which become important at GA level
- Ask for a more formal peer review - and specify your intent to develop it to GA
- After dealing with feedback from that, by all means submit it for WP:GAR.
I am not sure how to add references can someone help explain?
~~Designedge (talk) 13:00, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Next to a sentence the reference will support, type "<ref>THE INTERNET ADDRESS OR OTHER SOURCE space NAME OF THE SOURCE</ref>", here is an example "<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QwerpQwertus My Userpage </ref>" and it will appear like this[1]. Next type {{reflist}} in the references section to produce...
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QwerpQwertus My Userpage
... hope that helps! ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 17:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!
Any ideas how i can move the page to the mainspace there seems to be no move option on the page?
The "move" option is near the top of the page. In the default Vector skin, this is in a drop-down menu to the right of the screen, after "History" and the "Watchlist" star (see picture). Chzz ► 01:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Universalrambutan/Brains Matter Science Podcast[edit]
~~Universalrambutan (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Looks good, but you need good third-party references from newspapers, news stations, big websites, ect. to prove that it's notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. It could also use some categories and, if possible, an infobox, which I can help you with, but good job! - after you work on it some more, would you like me to move it to main space for you? ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 17:48, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lalit_03/Bhander,_Pali_(Rajasthan)&oldid=351863173[edit]
- Good, all it might need is a few more good reliable references from newspapers, news stations, big websites, ect.to prove its notability and why it should be included - I've undone User:Shyamsunder's blanking of the page (I'm not sure why he did in the first place) so you can continue to develop on your article. Hope that helps! ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 17:57, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
i am truly not the one who should be writing an article for the public but i seem to be willing...i am at a complete loss on the style and a format that would be suitable for Wikipedia's audience
- Hey, at the moment the layout of the article looks fine. The infobox works well, you've got links and a box of links at the bottom as well which is great. The only problem I can find with the article is with the references - if you can please use inline citations, if you can. Chevymontecarlo 10:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Notice with no explanation specific to the For the Love of Meghan article have been left stating that the tone of the article may not be correct for Wikipedia, and that cleanup may be required to meet the quality standards. I have updated the reference change request, but as I have no instructions as to which portions were not liked by the editor, I do not know where to make the appropriate changes. Feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
I made this article, it has been edited but I would still like if you would leave me feedback. Thanks
~~Mr.Kennedy1 (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Nice little concise article; consider adding a reference or two for the prize money if you can. I'm glad to see that you've got inline citations for the references instead of just a list. Also the infobox is really nice as well. Chevymontecarlo 10:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
~~Rajendraladda (talk) 10:19, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
- Note: From contribs, presumably Swami Sri Sitaramacharya Chzz ► 00:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)