Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 January 26
Oliviayard (talk) 10:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Olivia, and thanks for your interest in participating at Wikipedia. However, I have had to propose this article for deletion because it consists entirely of content published at http://www.amazon.com/Olivia-C.-Grosser/e/B002PCBXN4 and so violates our copyright policy. (Though from the rules provided at https://authorcentral.amazon.com/gp/help/terms it is not immediately clear to me who exactly holds the copyright on the biographical text there).
- The other thing I wanted to mention to you is that you may want to rename the image that you have uploaded for use in the file something other than "File:Author Photo.jpg Author Photo". We have many photos of authors, so perhaps a name like "Olivia Grosser photo" would be more useful and appropriate. Regards, WikiDao ☯ 18:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
She's the one
DavidGekiWolf (talk) 11:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Buddy is from NBN
DavidGekiWolf (talk) 11:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
User:MJGray1975/Corrie![edit]
Want to check I can publish this page with references given. many thanks
MJGray1975 (talk) 11:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Link to article is: User:MJGray1975/Corrie!
- Tkotc (talk) 17:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Have added numerous links from related pages, as requested. Is the article ok now?
Sackett (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I would like to make my article live on the site.
Migperez1 (talk) 12:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Come back when you've read WP:ARTSPAM. -Cntras (talk) 12:36, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I've altered some of the article after reading the links you referred me to.
If my article still isn't okay, I'd like to know the difference between my article and other companies in the same industry.
FXCM - FXCM FXPro - FxPro CMC Markets - CMC Markets MIG Bank - MIG Investments
Thank you for your help.
Migperez1 (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- When I look at WP:COMPANY, the first line reads:
- An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability.
- So the problem is that your article is a well-written description of the company but it does not cite the requisite significant coverage.
- All of the reference links are really about the other entities involved and not really what one could describe as "significant" coverage. In particular, references 1 and 2 are essentially database entries. Reference 3 has exactly two sentences describing the barest outline of one business agreement. Reference 4, which you describe as "Hantec expand its presence ..." is, if anything, about the other party in the transaction, Black Pearl. It is a news release. It comes from prnewswire.com. Reference 5 gives us a PR overview from Ricoh's point of view of how its products may assist Hantec, but it really isn't much about Hantec.
- Your article, if written for a newspaper, would have been such significant coverage, explaining and describing to the reader the nature of the company. Can you find some kind of reference or references more along those lines? The difficulty is that your article is really the primary source of the information it recites. Tkotc (talk) 17:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Request for feedback. thank you!
Cocoruff (talk) 14:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
LLTop100 (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I created this article to the best of my ability. I am not affiliated with this group, and I feel that their business practices deserve our attention. The article currently contains an "unreviewed" header. Your review is appreciated. Thank you.
Startswithj (talk) 16:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Currently, the article provides no evidence of notability. See WP:WEB for wikipedia's inclusion standards. As such, it is in danger of speedy deletion. You should add third-party sources discussing this web service, so that that the article doesn't get zapped by a passing admin... Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I would be grateful for feedback on my first article; it describes the work of the North West London Cancer Network (NHS organisation) although I work for the Organisation, I felt we were definitely not self promoting and the article was neutral and a helpful addition to Wikipedia. I would like the article to grow as I have lots more links etc and the Cancer Networks will have an interesting journey over the next few years with the abolition of PCTs, however wanted to make sure I was on the right track by starting with a basic article. I have read the Wiki guidance/article wizard and felt I have submitted accordingly.
Many thanks Nwlcn (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
First Wikipedia article created. Chose subject of collectible card set from the late 1970's. Any positive help appreciated, thanks.
Mrnoitawl (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I redirected this article to Non-sports trading cards, where I added a list entry for the card series. This topic does not appear to be notable. I searched google and google books for coverage of this card series, and all I could come up with were contemporary advertisements for the series. This will not satisfy WP:N, which is a requirement for all Wikipedia articles. The reference that you supplied was useful, but it does not appear to be a reputable reliable source that is needed to establish notability. Sorry about that - hope you have better luck next time.... :( Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Article on rare species of lizard found in the Amazon rainforest. Any/all feedback is welcome!
Questathon50 (talk) 19:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Wow! Refreshing to see an actual encyclopedic article, apart from the usual vanity fare. Great job. I created a redirect from its species name Tropidurus flaviceps, and Uracentron flaviceps (which one is right? see Tropidurus where there's a mention of the "Tropical Thornytail Iguana" is this a mistake?) -- Ϫ 19:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Ahh nevermind.. didn't read the "Taxonomy" section close enough where it's all explained. :) -- Ϫ 19:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Just looking for some basic feedback. Thanks!
Balmar (talk) 19:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing my article.
SaintLouisUser (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Please review, we intend celebrating Dewar in 2012, the centenary of this report that had major impact on medical provision in Scotland. as a first time contributor, comments and feedback are welcomed.
Milesmack (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
First time wiki editor, really struggling with formatting, adding pix and details, could do with a little help from an experienced wikipedian. Ideally would just adapt and rename an existing article for simplicity but easier said than done...
Kind Regards, Peter H
Phedderly (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I made the following changes: Express&diff=410416443&oldid=410272943,Express&diff=410419549&oldid=410416443,Express&diff=410420238&oldid=410419549; which you can also see at the article's page history, Express&action=history here.
- Note that in one of those changes, I added an inline citation (which then appears in the References section) of a Sunday Times piece about the inaugural journey, which says that it was actually from Berlin to Budapest (so I changed the article to say that, too).
- Do you have any images you would like to use in the article? If so, you can upload them for use at WP:UPLOAD, but you need to be very careful about images copyrights and licensing (more information at WP:Image use policy). WikiDao ☯ 19:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Have I done this right?