Help desk
< September 10	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	Current help desk >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

September 11[edit]

(article snipped)

KarinKarin-Sica (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Karin-Sica[reply]

This page is for questions about articles you have submitted. In your case, your submission looks like blatant advertising with no reliable sources. Some of us prefer more mature women instead. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:23, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leo Zero (Nee Elstob)[edit]

Hi. I am trying to put up an entry on a very well known DJ/Producer Leo Zero and it keeps getting knocked back, can you tell me why this is please, and advise me how it needs to be worded in order for it to appear on Wiki?

Thank you, Adrian.AJWD (talk) 14:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Simple - it needs references! See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, but in essence, the way you should write a new Wikipedia article is start with references from reliable sources - books, newspapers, magazines, anything that's got a likely reputation for close fact checking and editorial control, lest they get sued. Blogs and forums are no good as anyone can say anything on those without any proper checking. You need several, ideally four or five to make a good article, then write up in your own words what the sources say about the subject. And that's about it, really! --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Steve_Schlanger[edit]

What else do you need to formally make a page for Steve Schlanger at this point? We have provided many references and if you were to simply google his name, you would find more than enough resources to support the validity of his page. Thanks.

Sessoccer Sessoccer (talk) 16:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If your company or organisation (you don't indicate the "we" to which you refer) is affiliated with the subject, is attempting to use Wikipedia for advertising or promotion, or as a soapbox this raises the problem that the article is not neutral but instead promotional in nature. The concerns raised by the two original reviewers were that the page reads like an essay or a curriculum vitae, not a neutral and objective encyclopaedia article. That's an entirely separate question from availability of references. Biographies of living people are held to a higher standard and should not be created by those seeking to promote (or attack) a subject. K7L (talk) 16:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:iComunic8/Lloyd A. Silverman[edit]

I don't advise using Facebook, YouTube or LinkedIn as reliable sources to write a biography of a living person as such articles require reliable in-line citations and sources controlled by the article's subject are often not WP:NEUTRAL while sites accepting user-supplied content are not reliable at all. You do need substantial coverage in reliable sources to establish your subject's notability and any article must be carefully objective, neutral and free of conflict of interest. K7L (talk) 18:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Article...[edit]

Dear Ma'am or Sir,

I am writing to inquire why the article that I created, "Jeremy Cloward," has been deleted?

Thank you,

Laurie Mason

It is unfortunate that no-one explained this to you before it happened, not very polite, in my view. It looks like the article was speedily deleted because notability hadn't been asserted. Articles about living people are deleted quickly if they do not clearly explain why the person is important. Did your article go through the Articles for Creation review? Sionk (talk) 22:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brow Monument and Brow Monument Trail would like some feedback if i'm on the right path[edit]

hello. you and a variety of other folks have given me some good pointers on how to fix my initial effort at writing for Wikipedia While my edit isn't complete and i need to add some pictures and get some information back from the national register of historic places, i'm wondering if you could take a moment to look it over and see if i'm on the right path. thanksAbearfellow (talk) 21:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two reviewers have given you some specific advice on the draft article. Wikipedia isn't meant to be a travel guide, so things like map coordinates, directions and distances are undesirable. Sionk (talk) 22:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion? You might want to look at {{Infobox NRHP}}; there is a space for one set of co-ordinates which is used on most of the WikiProject NRHP articles. The featured article on the Statue of Liberty, for instance, has (40°41′21″N, 74°2′40″W) listed right in the infobox. Clicking on the co-ordinates provides various options to obtain an online map, so there's usually no need to provide detailed turn-by-turn directions in the article itself. Avoid telling the user "do this" or "turn here" in the article but provide just enough info that the reader would be able to find the landmark on a map.

To link to another Wikipedia article, don't use the full address (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...whatever...) as just placing the name of the page in a double pair of square brackets in your text will generate a link, [[Kaibab National Forest]] gives Kaibab National Forest, for instance. A Wikipedia article is not a reliable external source (if there's info in an existing article you want to cite, see what sources the original page cited and cite those directly) but if there are articles that provide any relevant information to your topic, link to them. For external sources, use inline citations (the <ref> and </ref> tags). 66.102.83.61 (talk) 06:43, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned this up a bit if you want to take another look at it. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 15:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Let me see what I can do. -- :- ) Don 04:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]