Main page | Talk page Reviewer — AFCH |
Submissions Category — List |
Showcase | Assessment | Participants | Reviewing instructions | Help desk | Backlog drives |
- This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
- For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, use the Wikipedia help desk.
- For factual and other kinds of questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
- You may create an article at the Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
- For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
- Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
- Bona fide reviewers at Articles for Creation will never contact or solicit anyone for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, please post on this help desk page.
A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often. |
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions |
---|
Contents
- 1 April 5
- 1.1 10:10:47, 5 April 2016 review of submission by WataniyaProject
- 1.2 Request on 14:16:03, 5 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Lynedia Sirieda Mathews
- 1.3 16:36:43, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Edelmoral
- 1.4 17:39:22, 5 April 2016 review of submission by TarynAdams
- 1.5 18:05:05, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Lynedia Sirieda Mathews
- 1.6 21:04:48, 5 April 2016 review of draft by Wdjones8585
- 2 April 6
- 3 April 7
- 3.1 Request on 00:41:14, 7 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Natalie White Artist
- 3.2 04:54:08, 7 April 2016 review of submission by 2406:3003:201C:201:CDF2:EEF7:2483:893C
- 3.3 Request on 16:00:32, 7 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Kdsimph
- 3.4 18:36:14, 7 April 2016 review of submission by Krmarshall
- 3.5 22:11:08, 7 April 2016 review of submission by 2600:8807:A400:7C:2D06:F0D1:B089:E1A9
- 3.6 22:59:43, 7 April 2016 review of submission by WikiAlexandra
- 3.7 23:00:26, 7 April 2016 review of draft by Pachisu124
- 4 April 8
- 4.1 08:32:50, 8 April 2016 review of submission by 114.121.135.206
- 4.2 11:35:46, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Penlite
- 4.3 14:14:26, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Jessicaeise
- 4.4 16:23:28, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Vawab
- 4.5 Request on 20:29:12, 8 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Aweb17
- 5 April 9
- 5.1 02:52:08, 9 April 2016 review of submission by 142.68.63.151
- 5.2 Request on 07:47:23, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by FrazeFento
- 5.3 11:06:02, 9 April 2016 review of submission by Lindadownunder
- 5.4 13:38:11, 9 April 2016 review of submission by Twatface666
- 5.5 Request on 13:43:07, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Twatface666
- 5.6 Request on 16:22:55, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by WVUHistorian9
- 6 April 10
- 6.1 02:48:30, 10 April 2016 review of submission by RenegadeTerry
- 6.2 12:49:02, 10 April 2016 review of submission by MilenaGlebova1989
- 6.3 Request on 14:17:08, 10 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Doug88Ocean
- 6.4 Request on 18:26:57, 10 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Cndrblck
- 6.5 21:46:00, 10 April 2016 review of submission by Gute Recherche
- 7 April 11
April 5
10:10:47, 5 April 2016 review of submission by WataniyaProject
- WataniyaProject (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Sheikh Ahmed Babal-Waiz ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Please I'm a new to writing pages on Wikipedia hence , I do not know clearly why my page declined the page is about a notable cleric in Kumasi , Ghana. This is the very first time something of this sort is put up online. Please kindly allow me it to appear. Thanks. Counting on your consideration.
- Hello WataniyaProject. This draft needs a lot of work before it can be accepted. One problem here is that you have transliterated this person's name in so many different ways and the referencing is so poor, that the reader has no way knowing who you are referring to or to verify the basic facts about his life. Is the person you call Sheikh Ahmed Babal-Waiz the same person as Shaykh Baba Al Waiz, "founder of Wataniya Islamic School, Aboabo, Kumasi" as described in this source? Is he the same person as Baba al- Wahiz, "a leading Tijani scholar", talked about in Political Islam from Muhammad to Ahmadinejad? You need to have published sources as inline citations in the draft which entirely back up his biography and demonstrate his notability. You've put a picture of the cover of Arabic Literature of Africa, Volume 4: The Writings of Western Sudanic Africa by John Hunwick with the caption "Biography of Sheikh Ahmed Babal-Waiz written by others". Instead you need to add this as a reference, with bibliographic details fully written out and the exact page numbers where he discusses this person. You need to remove all the Arabic text from your draft, all quotations from his writing, and all the unreferenced interpretations and evaluations of his work. Ditto, your personal reactions to his life and work. Do not write in the first person. Make the article brief, concise, neutrally worded, entirely in English, and referenced to only what published sources say about him For example, this is one of the many examples of inappropriate tone and unencyclopedic writing style in the draft:
- Amazingly, the historic narrative of Sheikh BabalWaiz is so huge that we could only state what we could. We hope Allah makes it easy for us to achieve this laudable and lofty objective. It is my wish to analyze the meaning of his names and alqaab [alias/code-names]. And I observe that the full name of our Sheikh signifies his noble position, exceptional dedication and commitment in the course of service to Islam and Muslims, as well as his propagation of this religion, since his infancy in Kumasi.
- I hope this helps. Voceditenore (talk) 16:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 14:16:03, 5 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Lynedia Sirieda Mathews
- Lynedia Sirieda Mathews (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Lynedia Sirieda Mathews ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Lynedia Sirieda Mathews 14:16, 5 April 2016 (UTC) I'm an doctor
- Answered below Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
16:36:43, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Edelmoral
I have attempted to submit this article for second time because it have been declined the first time, apparently the article was submitted before by another user(s) and has been declined too. I did a lot of fixes to make a neutral article, adding reliable secondary sources, paying attention to the golden rule and stick it to the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies).
The last reviewer tells me: "Still needs any further available amount of in-depth third-party news sources overall". I tried to reach the reviewer in order to discover the specific fails ofthe article...with no answer. Therefore I reviewed all the sources, removed some of them and added some others of better quality.
Now, I'm afraid of get a similar results of the current review without knowing exactly where the problems are, If I'm didn't fixed all of them. Edelmoral (talk) 16:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Edelmoral. I haven't gone through all the references, but the vast majority of them appear to be press releases or essentially reprints of them. Several more are simply company profiles. These do not attest to notability. It's actually better to have fewer but high quality references, i.e. in-depth articles about the company in major newspapers or something like the The Economist or The Financial Times, not trade publications or business websites that essentially reprint press-releases. For example, you don't need four company profile "references" simply to verify when it was founded and by whom, and none of them attest to its notability, only its existence. There is virtually no company history in the draft. Why? It was founded in 2010. When did it start trading? They aren't the same thing. Also, leave out the "Clients" section. It is purely promotional. Leave out the dubious "Honors" section, ditto. These "Best place to work" awards are essentially meaningless. Ditto Glassdoor reviews. Honors sections are for truly prestigious awards like the Queen's Awards for Enterprise. A six-year-old private company has an uphill battle to get acceptance now. Wikipedia has been and continues to be literally flooded with paid advertorials and the standards for companies are rightly being tightened up. A brief, concise article on the company's history and what it does, referenced to several high quality sources has a much higher chance of acceptance than a promotionally padded article referenced to dozens of press releases. Voceditenore (talk) 17:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your deep explanation Voceditenore!, there's substance in it and I will take your recommendations. Edelmoral (talk) 22:32, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
17:39:22, 5 April 2016 review of submission by TarynAdams
- TarynAdams (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Airbiquity ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
My question is about this page that I created: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Airbiquity
It was rejected for this reason: "This needs to focus with the best available amount of in-depth third-party news sources and not press releases and trivial passing mentions."
But I'm confused as there is only one press release and we are in the title of the majority of the articles so I don't understand how they can say "trivial passing mentions"
18:05:05, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Lynedia Sirieda Mathews
- Lynedia Sirieda Mathews (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Lynedia Sirieda Mathews ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User:Lynedia Sirieda Mathews ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Lynedia Sirieda Mathews 18:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC) Plessis I'm wondering why my article is not made
- Hi User:Lynedia Sirieda Mathews, your draft autobiography currently consists of only your name, you need to finish writing the article before we can review it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
21:04:48, 5 April 2016 review of draft by Wdjones8585
- Wdjones8585 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:IPass ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I want to create a new page for the company iPass. There is a dead link about this company, but the link goes to IPass. How do I create the page for iPass?
Wdjones8585 (talk) 21:04, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
April 6
03:06:29, 6 April 2016 review of draft by Organist00
- Organist00 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Switzerland ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
How do i organize and reference my many "references" in the text. I want to link them to above article in numeric fashion as in other wiki. articles? i.s. ;lkj;lkj 1) for 1st reference hi my name is 2) etc. Organist00 (talk) 03:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Organist00:, great question; the answer is at WP:Referencing for beginners. Give it a try and ping us if you have any problems. Also, do not leave a blank space at the start of any line,
it causes a coding error, like this
- So make sure you aren't leaving empty spaces at the start of lines or you'll get those weird gray boxes.
- Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:12, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
04:12:04, 6 April 2016 review of submission by 786wiki
786wiki (talk) 04:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC) Quick Question: The article I had submitted for review, my first, was titled: Sheikh Muhammad Ikram. It is now shown as: Muhammad Ikram. Would you please educate me, why? (If possible, I would prefer the full name in the title.) Thanks.
786wiki (talk) 04:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi 786wiki, the word "Sheikh" is an honorific title, similar to Professor, Doctor, Highness, Excellency, Duke, Chief, and so on. In the English Wikipedia we do not use such honorifics in articles - we use only the person's actual name - with very few exceptions, mostly for royalty who are almost always referred to by their titles. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
786wiki (talk) 19:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC) Hi Rodger. I couldn't find a "Reply" button so I hope this works! You are quite right: in Arab countries, "Sheikh" is an honorific (for an old person--the word for "old age" in Arabic is shaykhūkha!); in India and Pakistan, however, it is used as a proper name. So, unlike in an Arab country, when Ikram would have been admitted to primary school, his name would have been registered as: "Sheikh Muhammad Ikram" (which would be unthought of for a child in the Arab world), and that is how he is known! May I request therefore that in this case his actual name, as it would appear on his birth certificate had there been one at the time, be given as Sheikh Muhammad Ikram. Thanks. PS Please, for future reference, can you educate me on the proper way to reply in this situation. Thank you! 786wiki (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- Hi 786wiki. "Sheikh" is a common name (rather than title) in Bangladesh too. Sheikh Muhammad Ikram is how the first line of the page should start, but it may not be the best title for the page. For the article title, Wikipedia uses the name most frequently used by reliable English-language sources, which is not necessarily the subject's complete official name. The draft says he was better known as S. M. Ikram. If that's how most sources refer to him, that should be the title of the article, much as we have SM Sultan, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Sheikh Hasina. You probably have the ability to move the draft to the new name on your own.
-
-
-
- Help:Using talk pages gives some tips on communication, such as when and how to indent. If you want to be sure a specific editor otices a discussion that isn't on their talk page, it's a good idea to use their name in some sort of notification template, such as {{ping}}. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
- @Worldbruce:
- Hi Worldbruce, Thanks! Yes, "S. M. Ikram" would work too — "Muhammad Ikram" (as presently titled) doesn't ring right. So, How do I go about changing the title page? Or, would it be too much to ask one of the more experienced members, or the editor, to do it for me? Many thanks, again. 786wiki (talk) 10:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I've moved it for you. For future reference you'll find the "move" option to the right on the tabs across the top, sometimes hidden in the "more" drop down menu. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
Request on 09:01:16, 6 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Christos Evangeli
- Christos Evangeli (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Andrea Koukoumas ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Christos Evangeli (talk) 09:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I wrote a page on New Zealand writer Joan Rosier Jones. As I was in a hurry i somehow failed to delete the Andreas Koukoumas a previous page that i had written for Wikipedia. Can you please re name it an post it and I will go through and sort out anyhting else that is required. Sorry about that. It's been a while since I have donne this. many thanks. Christos
- Hi Christos Evangeli, an easy way to fix this is to copy all the content that is about Jones to a new draft page Draft:Joan Rosier Jones and add {{subst:submit}} to the page to submit it for review. You have to do this yourself while you are logged in so that you are correctly "registered" as the creator of the page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
12:06:34, 6 April 2016 review of submission by OriChayun
Hi. I need someone to check the grammar in a draft I created Draft:Spice_(singer). English is not my native language, so I think there might be minor mistakes. Thank you.
OriChayun (talk) 12:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
April 7
Request on 00:41:14, 7 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Natalie White Artist
- Natalie White Artist (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Natalie White (artist) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Please tell me what I need to do to edit this wikipedia page for acceptance. I felt as if I wrote it in accordance to the guidelines, and provided any and all necessary links.
Natalie White Artist (talk) 00:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC) @Natalie White Artist:, the relevant policy in your case is WP:NARTIST. To start with, you need to demonstrate that you are notable (I assume the article is about you) according to Wikipedia policies. In your case, you need to either add reliable sources demonstrating that your work is indeed held in several notable collections, or to demonstrate your work has been sufficiently covered by notable media. The article does not have a good structure (see WP:MOS for some ideas, or just look at articles about other photographers like Imogen Cunningham to see how it should look like), but this is a secondary problem. Also please note that editing of articles about yourself is, whereas not prohibited, is strongly discouraged due to conflict of interest. It would be much better if someone else would edit this article and not you. Best luck.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
04:54:08, 7 April 2016 review of submission by 2406:3003:201C:201:CDF2:EEF7:2483:893C
- 2406:3003:201C:201:CDF2:EEF7:2483:893C (talk · contribs) ()
Hi. I've submitted this draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:MerryMakr_TJ) for a review but I wish to change the page name from "MerryMakr TJ" to just "MerryMakr". Would that be possible? Thanks!
TJ 2406:3003:201C:201:CDF2:EEF7:2483:893C (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 16:00:32, 7 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Kdsimph
Kdsimph (talk) 16:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
18:36:14, 7 April 2016 review of submission by Krmarshall
- Krmarshall (talk · contribs) ()
This page was deleted after the image I was submitting to Wiki Commons was rejected. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:St._Patrick%27s_Council_Bluffs,_IA_on_Harmony_St..jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
I own the website that I also put it on and was attempting to donate it here too. But if nothing else I would like the to be able to restore the hours of work I put into creating the page, remove the single image that was complained about, and resubmit...
And seriously, could not the image have just been removed and reconsidered for creation automatically. Seems like a horrible process to delete all the work due to a single failure. Makes no sense.
Krmarshall (talk) 18:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- I have since seen that the text must have been too similar to the original, that I also wrote. Krmarshall (talk) 16:12, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
22:11:08, 7 April 2016 review of submission by 2600:8807:A400:7C:2D06:F0D1:B089:E1A9
- 2600:8807:A400:7C:2D06:F0D1:B089:E1A9 (talk · contribs) ()
Why was this page not posted? It is the definition of my word. nanobugged also nanobugged googled also https://www.amazon.com%2Fnanobugged-Keith-S-Taylor-ebook%2Fdp%2FB017XRI4VO&usg=AFQjCNGSDVlcDMUZPaMOL0yp2ztDYMFFHA&sig2=v_hg1f5unTU7bjrBkeoJqA 2600:8807:A400:7C:2D06:F0D1:B089:E1A9 (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- @2600:8807:A400:7C:2D06:F0D1:B089:E1A9:, what page is your draft, we can't see it unless you post a link to your draft page. Also, have you read WP:Neologism? It's not enough to just show us that you invented a word, you have to show that other people in serious media/academia are making note of the word, not just that it pops up on Google or is in the title of an Amazon book. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
22:59:43, 7 April 2016 review of submission by WikiAlexandra
- WikiAlexandra (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:TopSpeed.com ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi there!
I've improved Draft:TopSpeed.com over time, and I feel it's quite close to Wikipedia's standards for being published. The reason it has been declined so far is due to the lack of sufficient in-depth sources talking about the subject, instead of the subject's content. I feel this is a bit hard to find, since the subject is a digital publisher website, and, after checking out other websites in Category:Automotive websites, the sources that talk about them are usually only due to an acquisition/merger or product launch press release.
However, I did manage to find a few sources lately (both about the website and its content), so hopefully it's getting there.
I would appreciate any help in finding any more reliable sources, maybe I'm not that good at searching :) Thanks!
23:00:26, 7 April 2016 review of draft by Pachisu124
- Pachisu124 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:KibaGames ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I need help please...
Pachisu124 (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello @Pachisu124:, what is your question? I looked at your draft, and you've provided no WP:Sourcing at all, which is required. I strongly advise you read this 10-second summary of our Notability guideline which your draft must meet to be published. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
April 8
08:32:50, 8 April 2016 review of submission by 114.121.135.206
- 114.121.135.206 (talk · contribs) ()
- No draft specified!
114.121.135.206 (talk) 08:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @114.121.135.206:, what is your question and what draft are you asking about (please post a link to it)? MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
11:35:46, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Penlite
I tried entering my brief autobiographical article on my user page, but got this official message, in a pink box: "If you want to draft an article, please create a userspace draft instead of creating it here." So (as near as I can remember) I clicked on the wikilinked words "userspace draft," inserted my text, and when finished, submitted it for review per the instructions on the screen. I was not trying to violate wiki protocol, I was trying to obey it.
Yet, today, when I logged back in, I was confronted with a notice that my attempt to create the page and submit it for review was rejected, with the chastisement that (in so many words) I should have just uploaded it without submitting it for review! My sandbox was empty, and the User:Penlite page was basically blank. No trace of my extensive work.
Somebody needs to clean up the confusing nomenclature and instructions about "userspace" "main page" etc., and the various flags and warnings and instructions that apparently are appearing in inappropriate times and places. If you do not want people to do something, don't tell them to do it. Please.
Penlite (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's the automatically formatted message I got, in a tan box:
-
- Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:
Inside of the TAN box was GRAY box (presumably the only personal element of the message), that said:
-
-
- This is obviously not an actual article, this belongs on your main user page. Please do not submit it for review, AFC deals only with articles, not users'"about me" information.
-
Then the rest of the tan box said:
-
- Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Talk about conflicting instructions ! Wikipedia needs a better way to communicate about these topics.
14:14:26, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Jessicaeise
- Jessicaeise (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Department of Agricultural Economics (Purdue University) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am requesting a re-review in order to get specific feedback for my article. I have received two rejections so far but neither reviewer gave me specifics of what I need to change. I was hoping by reaching out to the help desk that you may be able to give me specific ways in which I can improve my article.
- Hi Jessicaeise Short answer - all your referenced sources are published by Purdue University or its affiliated structures, thus the topic is not (yet) proven to be notable. Longer answer - You need to cite multiple independent sources that contain in-depth information about the topic. "Independent" in this context means mainstream newspapers, magazines, books and other reputable publications, that have no connection at all to Purdue University. Wikipedia does not care much for what a subject (or it's friends and associates) have to say about itself - we are only really interested in what outsiders have to say. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Roger Roger (Dodger67),
I want to thank you so much for you speedy feedback. I was wondering, would it be appropriate to use some sources that are associated with my topic or should they all be independent of my topic, with no direct affiliation whatsoever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaeise (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Jessicaeise. Wikipedia favors large, comprehensive articles. Information about a particular department within a university almost always belongs in the main university article, not in a stand alone article. Individual departments rarely satisfy the notability criteria. For more information, see the section on faculties, academic colleges, and departments in the essay "Wikipedia:College and university article advice". Also consider WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, which notes that except for law schools and medical schools, parts of universities are not inherently notable.
- There is an entire WikiProject Universities dedicated to articles about universities. Their article guidelines, referenced above, may help you see how to incorporate some of what you've written into Purdue University. You can also ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities or Talk:Purdue University. If you're determined to go the separate article route, I wish you luck, but fear you will be disappointed. To answer your specific question, independent sources must be the basis for the bulk of any article. Non-independent sources may be used for a lesser portion. It's best to use them only for essential but non-controvertial details that you can't source any other way. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
16:23:28, 8 April 2016 review of submission by Vawab
It was suggested that my Article "Waban Library Center" needs improvement....Can I have some suggestions ? Thanks Vawab (talk) 16:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Done Hello @Vawab:, this helpdesk is for article still in Draft stage, and fortunately your draft has been approved and published, so outside of our jurisdiction. That said, if you drop into WT:WikiProject Architecture you might find someone to offer advice. As a non-building expert, my main suggestion would be to google up a few news articles (ideally not just local-interest ones, though one or two of those would be fine) that point out unique and interesting things about this building/institution, then you can add those facts and cite them to the sources. I see Boston Globe has mentioned the building a few times, so maybe check those, and whatever else jumps out at you that's from any reputable news source, academic paper, etc.
- If you yourself live in the area, a photo(s) of the building would be a strong addition, and maybe there are some other sites of interest in the town that lack photos, so you can help Wikipedia and have fun by doing a little expedition to snap those shots and upload them so the world can see more Waban.
- Nice work on your now-published article, hope you'll stick around to do more, and/or figure out existing articles about your area that need photos added! MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 20:29:12, 8 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Aweb17
I have been denied three times by the editors and I am unsure why. Many people on here has far less notability and have been accepted. I am unsure why my creation has not. I need help editing this article for a approve submission.
Aweb17 (talk) 20:29, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
April 9
02:52:08, 9 April 2016 review of submission by 142.68.63.151
- 142.68.63.151 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:RBC Morphology ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
142.68.63.151 (talk) 02:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi I'm wondering why my article Draft: Rbc morphology was declined. As far as I know, it doesn't read like an essay. I have no opionions in the article.If there are opionions, they are of the authors I wrote the articles from. Everything was cited. 142.68.63.151 (talk) 02:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC) Sion55 (talk) 02:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 07:47:23, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by FrazeFento
- FrazeFento (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Ron Fenton ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
To whom it may concern, I am having trouble submitting an artical on Ron Fenton, South Africa Theatre Personality, first it was formatting, which I re-did. The second time I submitted, it got rejected on the grounds of notability. My subject is a notable personality in South African Theatre History, documented as a theatre personality. He has acted in a large number of professional plays, acted alongside many famous people. I put in links to productions he was in, referenced the famous people he worked with. Can you please let me know what is is exactly that my artical lacks, with a view to improve?
I still need to populate with his individual written works. Although, Theatre in South Africa is not documented too well in the 1970's, due to aparthied and other politicsl struggles. And amazed what i have found, hence the prompt to put Ron Fenton on Wikipedia. I am still looking for new resources. I was hoping it would get approved so hopefully to prompt orhers to add in or content
Look forward to hearing from you
Frazer Fenton.
FrazeFento (talk) 07:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi FrazeFento. It sounds as though you're thinking of "notability" as it is used in common parlance, rather than the specific way Wikipedia defines it. "Notable" in Wikipedia means meeting the criteria of one or more notability guidelines. The most applicable guidelines in this case are notability of actors and notability of creative professionals (authors and directors). Demonstrating notability generally comes down to proving that reliable secondary sources independent of the subject have written about the subject in depth. Acting in a large number of professional plays, acting alongside many famous people, and writing many plays does nothing to establish notability.
- A theater's program listing cannot help establish notability because it is not independent (it has a vested interest in promoting the actor/writer/director). The program listings cited by the draft are also not in-depth, they merely mention Fenton in a cast list. Furthermore, Wikipedia is usually interested in the actors who played King Lear or Marc Anthony, not so much in those who played the role of Messenger. The draft mentions the existence of two newspaper reviews. Those might help establish notability. They are presumably independent, but do they cover Fenton at length or are they just general reviews of the play? --Worldbruce (talk) 15:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
11:06:02, 9 April 2016 review of submission by Lindadownunder
- Lindadownunder (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Wong-gie dialect ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi I am requesting help because I am trying to contribute a list of Wonggie words to Wikipedia. I am trying to contribute to the next free column which is the 5th column - I hope it can be seen if you click on the link here http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Swadesh_lists_for_Australian_languages
However I don't know if I'm doing it correctly or not now, because HausterBot left a message to say that my entry here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wong-gie_dialect is only a draft and will be deleted shortly. I don't know if he means the general info about the Wonggie language I submitted or my list of Swadesh words will be deleted or both.
Unfortunately because I couldn't see a reply button, I couldn't work out how to communicate with HausterBot, to ask him what step I've missed out. All I could think of was trying to explain it here.
I'm guessing the email from HausterBot means the general information and/or the list words I've typed in haven't been submitted correctly so they aren't "live" or available for others to view. If I've missed some step,please would you mind emailing me.
There aren't many copies of the Wong-gie dictionary I am using to make the Swadesh list, and the aboriginal dialect is disappearing, so I thought it would be useful to catalogue as many of the Wonggie words as possible and put them up onto Wikipedia for others to use. Sorry, because this is the first time I've contributed to Wikipedia and I'm not very internet savvy, I need a bit more guidance than most.
Thanks kindly Lindadownunder
11:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Lindadownunder (talk) 11:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC) Lindadownunder (talk) 11:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
13:38:11, 9 April 2016 review of submission by Twatface666
- Twatface666 (talk · contribs) ()
- User:Twatface666/sandbox/Malcolm "Scruff" Lewty ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Dear sir madam, please can you tell me how to upload a photograph please?
Twatface666 (talk) 13:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 13:43:07, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Twatface666
- Twatface666 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Malcolm "Scruff" Lewty ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello there, I see my article has been declined. The thing is, it's about "Malcolm Stephen "Scruff" Lewty", and I AM Malcolm Stephen "Scruff" Lewty. I'm actually writing about myself.
Does this clear everything up at all ?
Sincerely
Malcolm Lewty.
Twatface666 (talk) 13:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Twatface666. Unlike Facebook or MySpace, Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources have published about a person, not what a person says about themselves. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 16:22:55, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by WVUHistorian9
- WVUHistorian9 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Lloyd L. Layman ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Article reviewed but not accepted. I need to know what I can do to revise so it will be accepted.
WVUHistorian9 (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi WVUHistorian9. Outstanding choice of topic! I've added a further reading section with eight independent, reliable, secondary sources. That should settle any questions about notability. I also added links to some of the references so readers can quickly access them or figure out how to access them.
- Two of the references cited are problematic. (1) "Layman Gets National Job Newspaper Article" is an insufficient description. For a reader to find that source they would need at least the name of the newspaper and the publication date. Include author, publication location, and page number too if you have them. (2) "Lloyd Layman Archival Collection, West Virginia University State Fire Training Academy" sounds like a primary source closely connected to Layman (his letters and personal papers?) Such material may be used in Wikipedia, but only very carefully. Original research is not allowed. Also, archive collections typically consist of multiple boxes containing multiple items. Any citation needs to be as specific as possible regarding which item in the collection supports the statement where cited.
- Try to replace citations of the archive with the secondary sources that have been added to further reading. If you don't have access to the two subscription ones, you can get them through WP:RX or use Special:EmailUser to email me and I'll reply with the two pdfs as attachments. Finally, revisit the lead with Wikipedia:Writing better articles and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section in mind. I've given the reader a bit more context by putting the dates of birth and death in the first sentence. Consider adding nationality (remember we're read from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe), postponing the long list of job titles in favor of a very concise description of profession (police chief and fire chief), and not burying what he's notable for (revolutionized firefighting). Once you have the reader hooked you can give a more thorough explanation. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
April 10
02:48:30, 10 April 2016 review of submission by RenegadeTerry
- RenegadeTerry (talk · contribs) ()
- User talk:RenegadeTerry ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Please explain in detail why my page has been denied. Thank you
RenegadeTerry (talk) 02:48, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- In the box of the top of the page is a detailed description of what I feel is wrong with this article. It does not contain any references to third-party independent sources, and therefore we cannot verify that the information provided is true. Please review the guidelines on biographies of living people, as well as the instructions on references. Please note that if multiple independent sources cannot be found for this topic, it does not belong in the encyclopedia and will continue to be rejected. If you have any further questions, you may ask them here or at User talk:RenegadeTerry/sandbox/Terry Morton. Hope that helps. Bradv 02:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
12:49:02, 10 April 2016 review of submission by MilenaGlebova1989
- MilenaGlebova1989 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Zhasminka ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi editors! I have submitted this article for review and got declined due to it not being notable.
Please see the following article that has been posted and approved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandra_(Esposende)
It is similar in nature, or am I off on that?
It is a small populated municipality or division, with population smaller than the municipality I am describing. It has two sources, one of which is in Portuguese.
I could not find any English sources for my article, however, please also see the following page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saratov#cite_note-2010Census-10. It has resources that are in Russian. How come those are valid?
There are third party articles that I listed as resources in my entry. One of which is a local media coverage article. How come it is not considered valid?
Please let me know how I can make this article happen.
Thank you for your help and input.
MilenaGlebova1989 (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi MilenaGlebova1989 as a subdivision of a city it may be difficult to establish that it has sufficient notability to sustain a separate article. I think you could consider adding the information to the Saratov article. The topic specialists at WP:WikiProject Russia might have more specific advice. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 14:17:08, 10 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Doug88Ocean
- Doug88Ocean (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Eco-repetition ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Thanks for the note. I would like to know what other information you might need for this, as it is term that should be logical to understand, as nature repeats itself every day, with sounds of nature/animals that call to one another. These sounds happen daily, and therefore they repeat. This is therefore what "Eco Repetition" means. I am not sure what studies or information might be needed to prove this, as I believe it is common knowledge. It is this new term "Eco Repetition", which "qualifies" or describes this occurrence. We have used the word to link that noise or activity to Nature, and when blended with a message to humans, such as a reminder to do something when you hear the sound, you end up with a powerful "alarm clock" of nature, which goes off automatically on a daily basis. I do not believe there is any such way to further study or prove this, as everyone knows the noises happen - it simply depends how that noise is used to become a useful message to humans. In our case, it is via a play or show, which educates and reminds people about undertaking a certain activity - in this case, recycling or better waste management.
I look forward to hearing from you. Doug
Doug88Ocean (talk) 14:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Doug88Ocean. The neologism is not a suitable topic for Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary#Neologisms. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Request on 18:26:57, 10 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Cndrblck
This article keeps getting rejected for notability, but at this point I have no idea why. The article is for a podcast that is hosted by two people who each have their own Wikipedia pages (their notability is not in question). On top of that, the podcast has been referenced by The Daily Show, Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, etc. I specifically added content to the introduction that calls out the notability of the podcast.
How is this not notable?
Cndrblck (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
21:46:00, 10 April 2016 review of submission by Gute Recherche
- Gute Recherche (talk · contribs) ()
- Daniel Puente Encina ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Daniel Puente Encina biography was classified as an C article and I'd love to know how I might improve it. I will keep on collecting information. Regarding his birthdate he never told anybody the truth. I listened to several interviews where he gave weird answers with fictive numbers as eg "I am 468 years old and I want to become 900". If somebody doesn't want to reveal his or her age, I think we should respect personal decisions. I started to collect information about this artist in 1996.Gute Recherche (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Gute Recherche (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Gute Recherche This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Now that your draft has been accepted, it is outside of our scope. I suggest the following links, but the Wikipedia:Help desk may be able to give you better advice:
- Wikipedia:Article development
- Wikipedia:Writing better articles
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section - the lead is weak
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking - assess the value of each link, new editors tend to overlink
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting - italics are being used for foreign words and for titles, but inconsistently
- There are scattered error messages in the references
- Translate or improve other articles. (See Wikipedia:Translation, Wikipedia:Community portal, or one of the projects like Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians if you are unsure where to start. If your interest in culture extends to art museums, Grazer Kunstverein , Kunstmuseum St. Gallen , and Kunstmuseum Wolfsburg need translation.) The more widely you edit, the more ideas you'll have about how to improve your first article. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thank you Gute Recherche (talk) 08:06, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
April 11
05:19:54, 11 April 2016 review of submission by Dmacfady
Dear Bradv/Wiki Editors Thanks for looking at the article. Could I please ask what constitutes peacock terms in the article? I have no professional connection to the artist in question and remain very uncertain of which terms are not proper. Without a list of them, I'll be guessing forever. Thanks very much for your expert insight. Once again, I would really appreciate a list, otherwise I'll remove the text from Wikipedia, since it doesn't seem proper in this context.I've already been trying for two months to submit two paragraphs. If we're talking about the "stature" of the newspapers quoted, the paper-based publication industry in Ukraine, Georgia, etc was decimated after the end of the Soviet system––and all publication subsidies ended. All news is therefore online and in venues we might in the West take to be "fleeting." I'm presuming the reviewers know the languages and social issues at hand, so that, I hope, is not the matter. I take, as suggested, the key issue to be inappropriate language, hence my initial query. I would be extremely grateful for detailed help.