Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 December 21
Nature Air Cargo
[edit]Is this satisfactory? Does the external link count as a source?
Kermitfrog101 (talk) 03:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
My latest mini-biographical article on a Gutenberg author in connection with Wikipedia's missing articles project. Clinton Scollard was the husband of Jessie Belle Rittenhouse, about whom I also wrote an article which is also here in Requests for feedback. Comments welcome.
Tkotc (talk) 05:37, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
This is my first contribution to Wikipedia. Any comments or improvement ideas are appreciated before it goes online for real! Thanks for your feedback!
Manumoosi (talk) 06:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I believe I have taken care to ensure this page follows the same style as all the other related pages (RealVNC, TightVNC, etc...) but I might have missed something... If so, let me know and I'll fix it! (I am quite new to wikipedia)
Thanks! Totaam (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Please check for refs etc. I have only included Englsh language references, but there are substantially morein Portuguese - should I include them?
Madeira1978 (talk) 09:32, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Need help to have this new page checked and verified, please.
Jcpriestley (talk) 12:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
User:Ronaldsteed/St. James Episcopal Church, New London, CT
[edit]Friends, I'm looking for comments on this article about St James Episcopal Church in New London, CT prior to moving it live. I believe the topic is notable given:
- The prominence of its Rector, Bishop Samuel Seabury,
- Its place in the Revolutionary War history of Connecticut,
- The prominence of its archetect, Richard Upjohn,
- And its placement on the National Register of Historic Places
I'm grateful for your thoughts.
Ronaldsteed (talk) 16:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I thought the article very well done. I think you've made a case for notability. There may be issues I didn't see or that I am not familiar with, so you might wait a few days for more comments. When you decide to move the article live, perhaps paste your four points supporting notability on your article's talk page, in case some passer-by questions the issue. I noticed on your talk page there is some message about the "Three Saints Tiffany Window" image you contributed, so make sure you have dealt with that too. (An easy fix.) Tkotc (talk) 19:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I am a new editor for Wiki. I am having trouble writing an addition to "Test of general relativity". There is something wrong with the wording or maybe the sources. The editor "Steve Quinn" recommended that I go to "Are you in the right place" to get help. Hence, my request for help at this site for new users. The addition is a new test that has been performed that shows that Mercury has a much lower precession than previously thought. I would like to add this text in a way that does not have problems with most of the editors that are objecting (like Blackburn, Quinn, DVdm). The text starts at the line that is " '===Alternative calculation of the Perihelion precession of Mercury=== "
Thank you
D c weber (talk) 17:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- You wish to amend an existing article. To say that you are having difficulties because "there is something wrong with the wording or maybe the sources" understates the issue. There are numerous comments on your user talk page and the article's talk page discussing the substance of the proposed contribution. I think that the best forum for resolving the disagreements that have arisen in a way that will not result in objections by the editors you name is the article talk page or possibly your user talk page. If you have a question about a specific wording, a reference, or how to encode the reference, perhaps quote the wording or show the reference here. However, it appears that the dispute is really over the substance of what you wish to add. For disputes, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Tkotc (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the help.. I just got a clear answer from the editors there. I came here because I thought it was just that I was a novice and I wasn't sure what the problem was. I'm clear now.
topic closed.D c weber (talk) 11:12, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I've posted this after receiving advice from another reviewer and am hoping it is now ready to fly. Is there a way to cross index this entry with "Paul Wright" so it is listed as a choice (maybe "Paul K. Wright (engineer) ) when people search for "Paul Wright" without the middle initial? This is my first of what I hope will be many contributions. Thanks a lot.
Gordyslack (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Done I went to the Paul Wright disambiguation page. Most users searching for your article will arrive through that page. I've linked (manually) your article from there (see my diff). Additionally, I've created Paul Wright (engineer) redirect - just in case. There is no need for Paul K. Wright (engineer), because I don't see a notable name conflict with any other Paul K. Wright. If the conflict arises in future, articles can be easily renamed, so don't worry about that. --Kubanczyk (talk) 21:09, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
To whom it may concern,
The following image png.file located at User:The_MuseBox_Canada/Ben_Lovett has been copyright tagged, under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication authorised by owner Ben Lovett to be shared in the public domain.
See edit here: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=File:Lovett.png&oldid=403591097
Please inform if this request for Wikipedia publication is successful. Thank you!
The MuseBox Canada (talk) 20:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Please review.
Xandaira (talk) 21:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- A lot of facts stated in your article are not supported by inline references. That doesn't mean I don't think they are supported, only that you need to do the referencing.
- Unless I entirely misread it, the article referenced as "3" doesn't support the statements under "Family". I thought perhaps the "External Links" might have something, so I clicked on the New York Times link, but it is useless to verify anything because it is just a paywall gateway page.
- Your article is interesting, and my first naive impression is that the subject is notable, but it would be much stronger if you had inline references. I would suggest you print out a copy of your article, number all the facts, and then see if you can draw an arrow from each fact to a statement in a supporting article. Then, where you have an important statement (e.g. that x and y were lovers; the list of properties), insert a <ref> tag and cite your source. It looks like the Vanity Fair article should supply many of these. There are alternative strategies, like putting the reference at the end of a sentence where the reference supports the whole sentence, or at the end of a paragraph, if that reference is the support for virtually the whole paragraph. Tkotc (talk) 23:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello there, first article here... would very much appreciate help finishing up. :) Article is about Nashville Wraps, a wholesale distributor of gift and gourmet packaging based in the Nashville suburb of Hendersonville, Tenn.