Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 October 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 8 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 10 >
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.


October 9[edit]

00:08:40, 9 October 2014 review of submission by 178.51.199.107[edit]

Hello, I have received an e-mail that my article about Anna Frants has been declined. It is the second article that I submit, and I was already critiqued for the first one. Please let me know what to change so I would be able to make corrections and resubmit it. I look forward to hearing from you and thank you in advance, Monica 178.51.199.107 (talk) 00:08, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Monica springer: Read the comments on the draft. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

06:45:18, 9 October 2014 review of draft by 182.73.196.242[edit]


182.73.196.242 (talk) 06:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a review you need to submit the draft first. Fiddle Faddle 08:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:32:22, 9 October 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Iblong2iyush[edit]


I am the owner of the website and page http://www.iysert.org/about.html This is a renowned organization of International Status and I even sent wikipedia a mail as requested by the Owner of that page authorizing use of the material from my website to be used in this Article.

Iblong2iyush (talk) 07:32, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So, assuming you sent it to our OTRS volunteers, please await their response. I suggest you contact the admin who deleted the page and explain this matter there. Fiddle Faddle 08:08, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:58:54, 9 October 2014 review of submission by 1.38.21.11[edit]


1.38.21.11 (talk) 07:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11:44:26, 9 October 2014 review of submission by ShalimarTroy[edit]


I am sure you are asked this often but how can I know what to fix if the reviewer does not leave any direct comments as to why the article was refused? Am I missing something within the Draft? I do not want to add references to places where it is not needed, and since I am not versed in knowing which substantive fact need citation, I think I could be wasting time both mine and the next reviewer? For example, do I need to prove Troy Christensen was born in Grand Rapids Michigan?

Secondly, much of the creative work was performed long before the existence of the internet, so how does one get citation of the creative work when magazines of the time are no longer available on the web or even in physical form?

ShalimarTroy (talk) 11:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@ShalimarTroy: But there are direct comments on the draft. Citations do not need to be to online material. Fiddle Faddle 12:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:40, 9 October 2014 review of submission by Msheering21[edit]


I need help in regards to disambiguation. I don't believe there is another Gallery Arcturus, but will there need to be an Arcturus disambiguation page or an addition of this link to an existing disambiguation page? Also if we get to the end of the suggested 30 days for the draft to be reviewed and posted and the article has not been posted, what are the consequences of me posting the article directly as a 'new article'? I believe I have met almost all of Wikipedia's rules for a new article so just curious. Kind regards Msheering21. Msheering21 (talk) 12:07, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no current article Gallery Arcturus so there would be no need for disambiguation.
There is no specific 30 day suggestion or requirement. The main problem with creating a new article directly is that such creations are far more likely to be tagged for speedy deletion. Although that seems relatively unlikely in this case. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

14:07:03, 9 October 2014 review of draft by Susan Benton[edit]


I've been submitting an article on Joe Kaufman (Republican candidate in one of the most important political races in the USA - against Debbie Wasserman Schultz) and it doesn't seem to get through. I use to submit things all the time, but you have added SO many instructions in the last few years and I'm having a hard time following them.

In the article I didn't want to say anything about the race as I thought it would be best to say that AFTER the election. But I cannot seem to get what I have written posted - HELP, you can call me, Susan Benton at 516-279-0765.


Susan Benton (talk) 14:07, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't been submitted yet. The requirements have been tightened, enforced, but hardly changed. Kaufman needs to pass WP:BIO. Fiddle Faddle 16:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

14:14:28, 9 October 2014 review of submission by HHaffield[edit]


Please can someone advise what I need to change in order for my article to be accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HHaffield (talk • contribs)

The editor who declined it has placed a helpful comment on the draft. PLease have a look at it. I see your draft as overly promotional and ill referenced, as do they. Fiddle Faddle 19:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15:35:06, 9 October 2014 review of submission by Onenessall[edit]

I was told that the sources are only self-published ones but there are 2 independent PR's which have travelled all over the web. Also there is an Interview listed which I was informed, was made by an independent media person from the States. The Lineage table is not self-published, nor listings of Ramakant Maharaj on Wiki pages related to the lineage Masters. I have found 4 third-party sources which I would like to know if they will be sufficient. Ramakant Maharaj is part of a Lineage of Masters. He appears on the Wiki Inchegiri Navnath Sampradaya Table which is itself referenced all over the web. So does this not count as verification?

my 4 3rd party sources are 1. http://www.advaita.org.uk/teachers/navnath_sampradaya.htm which is a table of the lineage that lists Ramakant Maharaj. 2. http://www.siddharameshwar.org/ a site that documents Nisargadatta Maharaj's relationship with his Master Nisargadatta Maharaj etc 3. http://www.nisargadatta.co.uk/ a site that describes the Inchegiri Navnath lineage and Ramakant Maharaj etc. 4. www.indiadivine.org which names 3 people who give initiation into the Navnath lineage - one of them being Ramakant Maharaj.

I also notice on wiki there is an Advaita Vedanta series of articles on teachers - Ramakant Maharaj is an Advaitan Master, too. Onenessall (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In general it is more likely to be successful working with our volunteer reviewers than arguing that you are correct. There is a strong probability that they know what makes an article acceptable because they do this a lot. Pretty much every alleged reference is to the man's own site! This will never fly. Fiddle Faddle 16:23, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I wasn't trying to argue that I am correct. I am just trying to find a way forward. This is my first time on wiki and I need all the help I can get. So can I get any help from the volunteer reviewers, please? Onenessall (talk) 18:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I just noticed your other comment "For a living person we have a high standard of referencing..." I just wanted to say that all the bio and info about Ramakant Maharaj is factual. I conducted a series of interviews with him in person, in India, and these were recorded, and then transcribed.There is no reason for the facts to be challenged. Also, I am a writer with a speciality in "Indian Religion and Philosophy". Onenessall (talk) 18:55, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your personal status in this is a problem for Wikipedia. It would not be a problem for Time Magazine, but it is for us. Please understand that I am not in any manner demeaning you or your work by this statement. OUr problem is that, however excellent a person you are and however professional you are, and however correct your work is, you are a primary source. See WP:PRIMARY, and you will see that there are very restricted circumstances in which that can be used. We must have sources that are classified as WP:RS. The thing is, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and it cannot record what is not RS, and which is, by your own statement, either or both of WP:OR or WP:COI.
I'd like other experienced editors to have a look at this challenge and to offer you their advice on this matter. Fiddle Faddle 19:23, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Tim. I appreciate all that you are saying, and I take it in the right spirit. It is a complex business... By all means I welcome any advice. I did not realize how many boxes had to be ticked. Just to let you know, what inspired me to do this article for Wiki, was this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mooji You will see that under his pic it states "Part of a series on Advaita Vedanta". I mentioned this relationship earlier. And as Ramakant Maharaj is a Teacher of Advaita Vedanta, I suppose I thought he might be listed there easily.I based my 'article' on this entry, having observed that the sources to Mooji's entry in Wiki are minimal: there are only 6 references and Nos. 2 & 6 are from his own site, No.3. is a reference to his paintings which is irrelevant to Advaita Vedanta. That leaves No.5, an interview published in a spiritual mag, and 1.the bbc carribean... And No.4 is a dead link which I have not been able to locate. I recently read on Wiki that more than 3 third-party sources are required. So...that's where I was coming from. I await your advice and will then take it from there. many thanks Onenessall (talk) 05:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC) Hi Tim! I noticed there was a new message but I don't see it, maybe a mistake. Onenessall (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Hi Tim! Just wondering if you have managed to obtain any guidance/advice re this entry on Ramakant Maharaj? many thanks Onenessall (talk) 04:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC) Tim, as so much time is passing can you advise me about reducing the content of the entry. In other words, what can remain, please? Would really appreciate some help. thanks. Onenessall (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17:21:27, 9 October 2014 review of submission by Nissan300zx[edit]

I create biography page , I am new to Wikipedia, and I have a multiple unsolved issues regarding my page. I would greatly appreciate it if you kindly give me some feedback how to fix this issues. Nissan300zx (talk) 17:21, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Nissan300zx: Please see Wikipedia:Help desk. This help desk is only for draft articles. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18:58:55, 9 October 2014 review of submission by Ninjabeard[edit]


Hello, I am not sure I'm requesting a re-review (?), merely that maybe someone could look at my revisions and comments on this piece that I did upload for publication and have put some work in to. I would welcome some feedback from a more experienced editor.


Ninjabeard (talk) 18:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done with a comment left on the draft article. Other reviewers should also have a look, please. Fiddle Faddle 12:35, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20:26:34, 9 October 2014 review of submission by 91.156.198.83[edit]


Hey, I noticed that this draft was recently reviewed and declined. I don't know how familiar the reviewer is with WP:WikiProject Video Games and their source guidelines, but in my understanding, the draft is notably and reliably sourced according to those guidelines. Plenty of primary sources were also included for additional verifiability, that could also have thrown the notability verdict off?

Strangely enough, if this article had been introduced directly to the main namespace instead of AfC, it would definitely have survived if comparison to the quality of referencing in many existing articles of similar scope tells anything. Possible disparity problem between actually acceptable content and AfC requirements?

But in any case I understand that notability was contested. Any specific suggestions to improve it? Would you say it's WP:Too soon? Are there any time limits for drafts? - 91.156.198.83 (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_October_9&oldid=1101228143"