→AFC: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puppet_Showplace&oldid=456790846 |
ArticlesForCreationBot (talk | contribs) Informing user about the move (task 9) |
||
Line 130: | Line 130: | ||
Could you go to [[Talk:Puppet Showplace]] and explain why you believe that an article which names multiple sources from two major daily newspapers "is unsourced or contains only unreliable sources"? [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 15:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
Could you go to [[Talk:Puppet Showplace]] and explain why you believe that an article which names multiple sources from two major daily newspapers "is unsourced or contains only unreliable sources"? [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 15:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
:From a brief look at the version I declined [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puppet_Showplace&diff=prev&oldid=456790846], it appears I made a mistake; sorry. I'm not entirely sure why I didn't see those references; I should have. How come, when I look at that version [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puppet_Showplace&oldid=456790846] it doesn't show the 'decline', it says "has recently been created"? <small><span style="border:1px solid;background:#00008B">[[User:Chzz|'''<span style="background:#00008B;color:white"> Chzz </span>''']][[User talk:Chzz|<span style="color:#00008B;background-color:yellow;"> ► </span>]]</span></small> 15:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
:From a brief look at the version I declined [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puppet_Showplace&diff=prev&oldid=456790846], it appears I made a mistake; sorry. I'm not entirely sure why I didn't see those references; I should have. How come, when I look at that version [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puppet_Showplace&oldid=456790846] it doesn't show the 'decline', it says "has recently been created"? <small><span style="border:1px solid;background:#00008B">[[User:Chzz|'''<span style="background:#00008B;color:white"> Chzz </span>''']][[User talk:Chzz|<span style="color:#00008B;background-color:yellow;"> ► </span>]]</span></small> 15:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
==Your article has been moved to AfC space== |
|||
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: [[User:Chzz/tennis]] has been moved to [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/tennis]], this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. [[User:ArticlesForCreationBot|ArticlesForCreationBot]] ([[User talk:ArticlesForCreationBot|talk]]) 16:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:20, 24 October 2011
|
|
Issues with your AFC reviews
- Research Project -- self evident.
- 1st Cavalry Division (German Empire) was actually referenced [1]. I moved the ref inline.
- Wikipedia:Articles for creation/The American Psychological Association's Stance on Repressed Memories -- do you actually mean it is unreferenced? It uses WP:CITE#Parenthetical referencing. Or are you unhappy with the level of referencing? The important parts, APA committee decisions, are actually well referenced and should probably be merged into the main article.
Regards. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 08:17, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- First, I can't see (as it's deleted). Second, yep, I didn't spot that reference. Third, I meant what I said, "Not well-enough referenced", ie that the references are insufficient, and I gave direct specific examples of facts that I could not verify - possibly they are covered by the references at the end of the paragraph? I have no problem if you wish to merge it, or accept it, of course. Chzz ► 08:22, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- 1st one was moved to Guardian Angels for a Smarter Life. The redirect was deleted thereafter as it was pointless. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 08:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- For the 3rd one, I'll suggest to the creator to merge that section, and possibly the history one too, after improvements. The issue is that the main article uses footnoted refs, and I don't feel like reformatting either myself... Have mörser, will travel (talk) 08:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- For the second one, I think the quote marks are confusing the script. Not sure how to fix this, but perhaps Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs) does. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 00:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Paris Lees article
- This is regarding Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paris Lees, which I declined as not showing enough notability. Chzz ► 09:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
Oh and the judges list mentioned, is here so you can take a gander if you don't believe me. Please reconsider :) MooseyJake (talk) 09:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC) The current references are as follows;
Articles need to be verifiable - that means, we need references that allow us to check that the facts are correct. For example: Lees was born in Nottingham[citation needed] and attended the University of Brighton,[citation needed] earning a degree in English Language and Literature in 2009.[citation needed] - we need to know where these specific facts can be checked.
At a bare minimum, to have an article on Wikipedia about a person, we need evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources.
I hope that helps explain. Please see also WP:BIO. Best, Chzz ► 09:30, 22 October 2011 (UTC) Thank you for the help, and I hope we can get this article up-and-running as soon as possible, MooseyJake (talk) 09:58, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
|
- After looking at several bio's on here, I can see it needs to be rewritten, but of those that I have seen, no references, the like of which you are pertaining to, are evidant, and these are bio's who have been submitted, approved and everything is OK. As such, is it possible to get a second opinion? MooseyJake (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- The existence of other 'bad' articles is a weak argumeent; see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
- Yes, it is possible to get another opinion; see Wikipedia:Third opinion if you want to do so. But, in all honesty - it clearly does not pass the notability requirements, and I'm 100% confident that any other experienced editor who checks the above discourse will agree - that the references you have given do not show "significant coverage in independent, reliable sources". Chzz ► 10:20, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes its a rubbish argument, but frankly I have yet to find an article on a journalist that successfully references the place where they grew up, using the example from above. I am rewriting it so that it is more alike to these, and maybe then it will be taken seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MooseyJake (talk • contribs) 10:53, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- After looking at several bio's on here, I can see it needs to be rewritten, but of those that I have seen, no references, the like of which you are pertaining to, are evidant, and these are bio's who have been submitted, approved and everything is OK. As such, is it possible to get a second opinion? MooseyJake (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Dewey Larson Article
Dewey B. Larson Hi Chzz. I was wondering how much you actually looked at this article. Notability requires one source of significant coverage. This article shows Larson's work was reviewed by none other than Isaac Asimov and Discover magazine. Why don't you think this is "significant?" Doug (talk) 11:10, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- Do the sources actually contain substantial information about this person?
- I was unable to locate any reliable sources anywhere on the internet which have any information about this person. Is there anywhere we can verify any information about him - such as the date of birth that is given, or where he lived, or where he was educated? Almost all of the article seems to consist of brief mentions of something he wrote; do any of the sources have anything more than a mention of his name? I was also unable to find any appropriate source that discussed any of his work.
- With regards to the last paragraph, do any of those last three references actually mention this person at all, or is it just inferring the possible later implications of his work? Chzz ► 11:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thank you so much for clearing AFC while AQ was asleep. I meant to come help this morning, and to a pleasant surprise, it was clear. Thank you so much! JoeGazz ♂ 14:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
- @Joe_Gazz84 tired of me asking you to help with AfC, eh? Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 15:12, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Yet another barnstar
The Articles for Creation barnstar | ||
Thanks for clearing that massive backlog. I logged into #wikipedia-en-afc, and I though EarwigBot had cracked when it reported there were only 7 submissions. When I had left for the night, there were 268 submissions, which were more than likely all reviewed by you. Excellent work, and thanks again. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 15:08, 22 October 2011 (UTC) |
Neat
D'oh - I should have thought of that myself. Will use it in future. Trafford09 (talk) 08:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 10:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Peridon (talk) 10:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
AFC
Could you go to Talk:Puppet Showplace and explain why you believe that an article which names multiple sources from two major daily newspapers "is unsourced or contains only unreliable sources"? WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
- From a brief look at the version I declined [2], it appears I made a mistake; sorry. I'm not entirely sure why I didn't see those references; I should have. How come, when I look at that version [3] it doesn't show the 'decline', it says "has recently been created"? Chzz ► 15:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Chzz/tennis has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/tennis, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 16:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)