Help desk
< March 27	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 29 >

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.

March 28[edit]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Axis Video[edit]

Greetings, I am new here and just need a little assistance on why the page was not approved. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Axis Video

Chris Chrischaos88 (talk) 00:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Axis Video was declined for the reasons given in and under the pink box on the submission page itself. Click on the links in the decline reason for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Cgmedasf#Your submission at Articles for creation: Mission Economic Development Agency (MEDA) (March 28)[edit]

I was wondering if you could advise the copyright issue with my article submission. MEDA is a legitimate non-profit doing great work in San Francisco. What do I need to show to you to get this published?

Cgmedasf (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Christopher Gil[reply]

Hi Cgmedasf - You need to not simply copy directly from the organization's own website. To pass the notability standards for organizations you need to find and use independent reliable sources such as news and magazine articles about the organization, but not press releases, the material must be written and published by people who have no connection to the organization - such as mainstream newspapers. (BTW - I cleaned up the section heading here.) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:52, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/mystampworld[edit]

I need help with the writing of this article. Can someone point out what is wrong and give examples of what would be acceptable for mystampworld. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Amblesider (talk • contribs)

Hi Amblesider. Looking at your draft so far, you have three references. One is just an internet ranking so is not significant coverage. One is a blogspot blog so is not a reliable source. That leaves you with only one source that can be considered both independent and reliable. That's not enough to prove notability by Wikipedia's standards. Check the links in the decline reason provided on the submission page for more information. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:08, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Praveen Anidil[edit]

I have included references for the article creation of Praveen Anidil. Can you please help by checking my references so that my article gets approved? Minnettu (talk) 09:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Todd A. Krasovetz[edit]

10:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)10:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)10:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)~

Do you have a question for us? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Myrvin/sandbox[edit]

Hi User:Myrvin - I have removed the copy of the draft posted here. Please don't do that - the link in the heading above is enough. You forgot to ask a question - how can we help you? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I realized I did it wrongly. I tried to change it, but clashed with you. I'll try again:

I am trying to create an article on So (at the beginning of sentences). It has been rejected with the comment "Not a grammar book" by User:Aggie80. Here is the link to the draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Myrvin/sandbox. Here are my comments back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aggie80#So_.28at_the_beginning_of_sentences.29. Myrvin (talk) 11:07, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Myrvin, I think this is one of the occasions that we need some specialist assistance so I have asked WikiProject Linguistics to advise us. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Myrvin (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion of the usage is archived at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2012 December 31#So.

—Wavelength (talk) 02:11, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:MGMT90018 Absenteeism/sandbox[edit]

Hi, this is my new experience in drafting article on Wikipedia. Could you show which part that need to be revised? How I could fix that? Thanks in advance for your help— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎635058MGMT (talk • contribs) 12:57, 28 March 2014

Hi 635058MGMT. Articles for Creation is only for the creation of new articles from scratch. It looks like you are trying to write an addition to our existing article Absenteeism. If that is the case, you simply make your addition directly to the existing article. Our reviewers here do not vet or review additions to existing articles. From the edit history, it also looks to me that you are doing this as part of a group assignment for a college or university course (possibly MGMT90018 Psychology of HR Practice at the University of Melbourne?) If this is part of an assignment, I strongly suggest that your instructor make contact at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard for expert help and advice. As a student, you are also welcome to ask for help and advice there. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:28, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/online exams[edit]

will you certify users, if they publish any article in wikipedia? i just want to know that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Dharmendra Koppineni (talk • contribs)

No, we do not provide any user certification. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rick_Swann[edit]

My recent Page for Creation was declined as there wasn't adequate third party sources cited. I had 16 sources, 13 of which are third party. I have resubmitted the article with new sources, now all 3rd party. This includes 5 newspaper publications online, 4 theatre listings, 2 reviews and 4 venue websites with the notable persons name in listings. Although my sources have changed there is not much difference. The only other way I could approach the situation would be to list a needlessly long list of sources, many of which cite the same or similar information. The feedback note also mentioned that the person may not be notable however there are a vast number of online third party references and features as well as a large international fan base.— Preceding unsigned comment added by RikoLabudovic (talk • contribs)

@RikoLabudovic: The subject certainly fails WP:BAND and it's questionable if the subject meets WP:GNG. Many of your sources are blogs and various websites; only a few are legitimate publications. Things like large international fan base aren't valid criteria. I'm a fan of "The King" Jim Brown but I can't scrape together enough reliable sources on him and that may be the fate of Rick Swann, too. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TEACH CHILDREN BUILD INDIA[edit]

dear friends,

I would like to know why the article "Teach children build India" has been deleted. I have kept all the rules and the contents are relevant and academic, as the initiative is socially innovative and growing.

I have read your message but I insist on its relevant. There are not many references because the movement was created in 2010 without a profit motivation and it is developed by residents of keonjhar, Odisha, India.

If there is anything I can do for the article to be published, and, this way, this innovative movement known, please, tell me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keonjhar (talk • contribs) 16:13, 28 March 2014‎

Your question regarding the deletion of the article TEACH CHILDREN BUILD INDIA has been answered at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#TEACH CHILDREN BUILD INDIA. The AFC draft submission by the same name has NOT been deleted, only declined. It is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TEACH CHILDREN BUILD INDIA. The reason it has been declined is in the pink box at the top of the submission. Further information is in the reviewer's comment(s) that are between the pink box and the text of your submission.

Please note that Wikipedia is a lagging indicator of notability. This means if an organization is not already well-known and covered in a significant way by reliable sources that are independent of the subject, Wikipedia will not allow an article to be created about that organization. Wikipedia is specifically not to be used to promote the topics it covers. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Keonjhar. While the article was deleted on grounds that it did not demonstrate notability of the organization, it would also have been speedily deleted as a copyright infringement. It was copied verbatim from the organization's web site. I have had to remove all of that text from your draft. I left a note there with further guidance on copyright issues. Before proceeding with your draft you should read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), and this essay which contain advice for editors trying to write articles like this. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here[edit]

I recently submitted an article with the name: FETUS EJECTION REFLEX and was very quickly rejected. Can you kindly help me to find the reason/s for rejection of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthonyamadi (talk • contribs) 16:30, 28 March 2014‎

@Anthonyamadi: Your submission, User:Anthonyamadi/sandbox, was rejected because the topic you are writing about is already covered by the article Ferguson reflex. The reviewer left a note in the pink box at the top of your submission stating this. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:45, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ronald L. Mondrush[edit]

In addition to the references noted in the resubmission of Articles for creation/Ronald L. Mondrush, he has asked to reference several letters of recommendation from notable people such as the Manager of Styling at Nissan Motor Company, and the Buick Motor Division Advanced Concepts Manager. Can you advise on submitting these as marks of notability? Also, pictures of all vehicles noted in the article will help immensely in showing the work and importance of Mr. Mondrush and his company Synthetex. I would like very much to imbed those as soon as possible. Many of these images note the company name, Synthetex, with signage positioned with the vehicle.Ronald L. Mondrush 17:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC) In addition to the references noted in the resubmission of Articles for creation/Ronald L. Mondrush, he has asked to reference several letters of recommendation from notable people such as the Manager of Styling at Nissan Motor Company, and the Buick Motor Division Advanced Concepts Manager. Can you advise on submitting these as marks of notability? Also, pictures of all vehicles noted in the article will help immensely in showing the work and importance of Mr. Mondrush and his company Synthetex. I would like very much to imbed those as soon as possible. Many of these images note the company name, Synthetex, with signage positioned with the vehicle.Ronald L. Mondrush 17:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Letters of reference that are published by reliable, independent sources may be considered, but those that are not published or which are published by or on behalf of the recipient are not considered. Any publication of such a letter for the purpose of "getting an article into Wikipedia" will not be considered. An example of a letter that would be considered: If the person were nominated for a high-level award or position such as a high level of Knighthood and the nomination information was published in a reliable source by someone not acting on behalf of the nominee, the letters of recommendation in the nomination could be used but it would not be the letters or their content that demonstrate the person's notability but rather the fact that an independent, reliable source chose to publish them. Even then, it might not show evidence that the person was notable: For instance, the publication may have used the material as mere examples in an article about how people are nominated for knighthood.

As far as the use of photos go, I recommend going to the Wikimedia Commons and uploading images which meet the Commons's strict "free license" requirements. Such images can be used in both articles and draft articles.

You should be aware that Wikipedia is not intended to promote the topics it covers. It is a lagging indicator of notability. This means that the person should be, without question, already notable by Wikipedia's standards (see WP:GNG and WP:BIO for details) before you attempt to create an article about the person. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here[edit]

How are you i want ask you about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Execution of C++ programs in shortest possible time (nanoseconds or milliseconds) what are the reasons that get it rejected and how i can improve itZaher s (talk) 18:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you zaher saif alhashami

@Zaher s: The pink boxes and the comments at the top of User:Zaher s/sandbox tell you why it was rejected. In short: Wikipedia does not publish original academic research (see Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not). The topic itself is simply not a suitable topic for an encyclopedia. Assuming you can host it without violating copyright law (a reviewer speculated that this was copied from a book or other source that he could not find online), consider finding a web-hosting service to host this information. But do not put it on Wikipedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Ipalacin/sandbox[edit]

My entire draft is in my sandbox and the one I submitted for your review appears not complete. I was having a problem with references; can someone please help me? Thank you for your consideration and advice. Ivette Palacin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipalacin (talk • contribs) 20:23, 28 March 2014‎

@Ipalacin:I have made extensive changes to the formatting of the references and added some "best guesses" for additional bibliographic information and URLs for some of the references you provided. There is one book source that I wasn't 100% sure about so I left a comment about it in the "afc comments" at the top of the article. I am also concerned that the coverage of this person is primarily local in nature. Local coverage doesn't carry nearly as much weight as "national" coverage would when determining if this person is notable enough for an article. I have also moved the page to Draft:Primus P. Mason. Another editor, Chris troutman, had some changes he wanted to make as well. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:55, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipalacin: Never mind; I'm not in the habit of making the same contribution twice. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:43, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you changed quotation styles from curly to straight. I made the change and referred back to your edit in the edit summary. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Your submission name here[edit]

Resolved

Is there any way of changing the title of the article to the person's artist name instead? from Hyun Kyoung Park to Hyon Gyon. AD Shin G. (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyun_Kyoung_Park[reply]

I moved Hyun Kyoung Park to Hyon Gyon. The page is in need of major work and if this person is not really notable, the page is likely to be deleted. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mean log deviation[edit]

I have just now added the following context to the beginning of the article"

"The mean log deviation (MLD) is a measure of income inequality. It is zero when everyone has the same income, and takes larger positive values as incomes become more unequal."

I wonder if you can now approve the article. This topic is not currently covered in Wikipedia. This article is a good start, and I am not aware that more background is available from other sources. Readers desiring more context can click on the link to income inequality.

Paulvonhippel (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC) Paulvonhippel (talk) 22:33, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Paulvonhippel: I appreciate you making the lede more easily understood. However, the article relies on a single source. How does this article meet notability criteria? Chris Troutman (talk) 23:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]