Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 April 13
This article pertains to the College House System of the University of Pennsylvania. I noticed that there was small article on Hill College House already and thought that it would be good to simply have a comprehensive list of all the houses with summaries. It's very similar to the article on housing at MIT. Yale, and other colleges. The summaries aren't long at the moment, but I think that this a good start from which expansion is possible.
Mikepatt77 (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- It's a good start but the sources or references definitely need some work - one source for the entire article is not really enough to prove the article's notability or verifiability/reliability. Chevymontecarlo 06:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I created this article using a Wizard but can't see how to edit the main title. It appears as User:Hurlzzz/Enter the Title of Your Article Here
Otherwise, please review for accuracy, references etc. Thanks
Hurlzzz (talk) 02:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Done Fixed your title, tagged a few things for improvement. Check your page's "History" tab to see what I changed. Per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) you're going to need one or two more neutral, third-party footnotes to verify statements made in the article. Just add the footnote at the end of the specific sentence(s) borne out by the footnote. Also, in the lede you refer to it as "fore-most"; isn't that totally subjective? Best to replace that with some more objective/neutral description, unless you have concrete numbers to back up something like "highest grossing", "highest-rated in a 2009 London Times poll" or similar purely factual statements. Try fixing those things mentioned here and in the tags at the top of the page and then check back in here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Carnagefairy (talk) 04:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think the article would benefit somewhat from the addition of an infobox, and perhaps more reliable sources. Chevymontecarlo 06:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there, I have just created this article and would like some feedback on content and accuracy. Thank you very much
KeepCup (talk) 04:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at the article there are some neutrality and tone issues; in places it sounds more like an advertisement than an informative, encyclopedic article suitable for Wikipedia. I also don't think the article's subject is really notable enough with the sources you currently have. Finally, judging from your username I think there may be conflict of interest issues as well, in which case if that is true you are probably not in the best position to write a neutral and informative article. Chevymontecarlo 06:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I have added footnotes as per your request. Please note that the information in the second paragraph is only from the 1st reference (not available online, though a description is available - I have provided the same as an external link). Therefore, I have not referenced every line of it.
I hope it is OK now!
Goks277 (talk) 05:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Couple things: your article has no categories (WP:Categories), you'll need those to publish. Please read the Category guidelines, and consider finding an article about a similar figure to see what categories he used to see what's standard. Your references are overall just good enough verify the article, but note that your footnote #5 is just a link to another Wikipedia article. You can't cite Wikipedia on WP, so remove that; other WP articles are just linked by wikilinks (the double brackets) as they occur naturally in the text. I note also you have a link in "External links" that should probably actually be used for footnoting. Please review "The Hindu article about Tribute to Sangeetha Kalanidhi K.S. Narayanaswamy- 101 Keerthana Mani Malai" and see if it can be used to footnote any of the text in the article, or to add a verifiable sentence or two. Check back in at this same posting after you fix those (I'll still have this same page on my Watchlist) and we'll see if it's ready to publish then. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestions. I have made the changes suggested by you. Kindly suggest whether any more changes are required.
- Overall pretty well-done! The main things I'd fix: footnotes go after the punctuation, with no space between. This is standard and looks tidier. Also, in your footnotes, where you say "The Hindu article" etc., you really need to do it as a proper citation, something like "KS Rocks Vina Concert in Chennai. The Hindu, 14 January 1994", with the blue-link portion being the title of the article. That way, even if the link moves in the future, we know exactly the name/date/publisher of the article and can find it if need be. That goes for most of your footnotes which are articles, though your "list of awardess" type footnotes are fine, except you want to add "at XYZ.com" or "at the Ministry of Culture (India)" in unlinked text afterwards so the reader can tell who is maintaining this list. Note that since the subject is deceased, it is acceptable to upload a single low-resolution image of him, just for this article, even if you do not own the image copyright; please read WP:Fair use for info on this. The photo is optional, but if you take care of the other items mentioned, you'll be ready to publish. Nice work on the categories, by the way. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:12, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I wrote a two-sentence description of Stan Dale with intention to expand. Please send me comments and add more pertinent information with notable references, particularly about his books and teachings, formal scholarly accomplishments, and professional career.
Liorj (talk) 09:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi - Could someone please take a look at my article? I'd really like the 'new unreviewed article' tag removed. Thanks!
Stevo372 (talk) 10:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I added a section titled "Mandatory Arrest Policies" to this article and I would like feedback about the quality of writing and any changes that should be made. My section is listed under "Mandatory Arrest Policies".
Meganmack1408 (talk) 11:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, should this article be a stub?
Emmasinclair (talk) 13:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- First things first: articles about organisations must include multiple, neutral, 3rd party footnotes/references. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). This is an absolute requirement for publishing. Secondly, the issue with the article is that it's more of a mission statement, advertisement, or self-description of the organisation, vice a neutral description of the group. The use of the word "our" is certainly a dead give-away. I've added a few tags at the top of things to be fixed, and those include links to the guidelines explaining how to fix them. A few minor things too: is it an "and" or an "&" in the official name of the organisation? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the feedback, great advice, I have changed the tone to be less advertorial and removed some content. I have contacted the Union and unfortunately they do not have any 3rd party impartial mentions for the notibility criteria, could they perhaps have a stub entry. They are a bona fide union who operated in the shadows of Unite Union, and as such find it difficult to be found. Thanks for noticing the name, I will correct this if it is worth continuing with the process. thanks again Emma
Andrickjhez021 (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Please review for final draft. Thanks in advance!
- Greetings, you added categories, but none of them were funcational categories (working links show up blue, non working as red). I fixed your categories for you, rather than be coy and try to get you to do it. You still haven't made your footnotes in-line footnotes: footnotes go at the end of the fact that your source substantiates, whereas yours are just clustered down in the References section. It needs to be like this:
| “ | In 1923, the Shobago Line train made its first journey, with only five passengers.<ref>John Smith. ''Railways of Wyoming''. Rodeo Press, 1943, ISBN 123-456-789</ref> | ” |
- Your links are still also "bare URLs"; just a stream of "http://" links rather than actual citations. I'm fine with people asking me for clarification, but please read your feedback, look at the fix tags at the top of the draft, read any linked guidelines, etc., and make sure that the changes you made (i.e. Categories) actually function like you intend. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Great, thank you much for fixing the categories! I will give the rest a crack. I'm finding this a pretty cumbersome and winding process, and it helps when I get a very straightforward answer/directions, rather than having to navigate full pages of text that are sometimes confusing and verbose for a first-time user! Thanks again!
Macomb13 (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Not a problem; it is a bit complex at first, but after a couple articles it becomes pretty intuitive. I can read about a political party in Uganda in the news and knock out a fully-formatted three-sentence stub article on them in about 5 minutes or less. Trying to read all the policy documents back-to-back is a bit much, but do try to take note of exactly the issues addressed in the tags at page-top. Especially in Feedback, those tags are pretty precise and there for very specific reasons, so they're a good indication of the priority fixes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:41, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Please review again and let me know if the changes now make the article acceptable. Thank you.
Parisispeedschool (talk) 14:45, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, still nowhere near ready. All your footnotes are to Parisi's own website. You must have neutral, 3rd party references of notability; please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) carefully for guidelines. Further, your categories aren't functional categories, they're just words put in Category format; please check out WP:Categories for info on how to assign cats. The two "External links" you have might have enough information to meet Notability requirements, but they need to be footnoted within the text to prove particular statements made in the article. There's also still the fundamental problem that the article is phrased like an advertisement, and is made by a one-shot editor with the same name as the organisation, which is a Conflict of Interest. Note that per WP:COI that conflict does not necessarily prevent you from writing an article about your own business, but there are a lot of caveats, and close scrutiny, for those situations. Note also that you will not "own" the article, so absolutely anybody can add any statement to it provided it's borne out by a reputable book or news piece. If anyone ever is injured in a crash at this school, for example, that could go right into the article.
- Please bear in mind the following:
- Wikipedia's Law of Unintended Consequences
If you write in Wikipedia about yourself, your group, your company, or your pet idea, once the article is created, you have no rights to control its content, and no right to delete it outside our normal channels. Content is irrevocably added with every edit, and once added will not be deleted just because the author doesn't like it any more. Any editor has the right to add or remove material to the article within the terms of our content policies. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually. More than one user has created an article only to find themselves presented in a poor light long-term by other editors. If you breach our editing policies or "edit war" in an attempt to obtain a version of your liking you are likely to have your editing access removed.In addition, if your article is found to not be worthy of inclusion in the first place, it will be deleted, as per our deletion policies. Therefore, don't create promotional or other articles lightly, especially on subjects you care about.
MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I think this article titled HIGH FLOW THERAPY is ready Thank you
Strangecow (talk) 17:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- So do I. I've fixed a few formatting issues, but overall it looks like a good start. The most important improvement that I could suggest is a very simple sentence that identifies the subject for people with no technical knowledge at all. For example, "HFT is a way to pump large amounts of oxygen into the noses of people who are having trouble breathing" (or whatever would be technically accurate). Most of our readers don't have any technical knowledge, and many of them speak some language other than English.
- A few more wikilinks to technical terms like nasal cannula might be helpful. You might like to read WP:MEDMOS or look at similar articles for ideas on further improving it. You might also like to join WP:WikiProject Medicine, a group of people who are also interested in improving Wikipedia's medicine-related articles. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I am looking for feedback on this article I created on the content and neutrality of the article.
Molin1088 (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- The article is not yet ready, so I've moved it to your Userspace so the draft can be worked on without fear of deletion. First things first: your images are all tagged for deletion since you have not provided sourcing/copyrigt data. Please click on each of your images to go to its page so you can update that information. Secondly: your linking and footnotes are not in a functional format; you may want to read WP:Footnotes. Long story short, anywhere other than "References" or "External links" where you have number with a little square and arrow next to it, like this [1], you have to fix. That means you have an external link in the body of the text, which isn't how this works. What you need to do is footnote discrete sentences. You have a sentence, you have a link to an article that somewhere in the article proves the point you make in the sentence. Take that link, put <ref> at the front of it and </ref> at the back of it, and put it at the end of your sentence. Note a nicely numbered footnote will automatically appear at the bottom of the article for you. First things first, fix all your links to proper footnotes, ensuring that those links actually prove a point you're making. They're not just for links to any related site: so not "in 1980 DeValo met John Smith<ref>johnsmith.com</ref>" but something like "in 1980 DeValo met John Smith<ref>''De Valo and Smith Hit It Off at Society Luncheon. Daily Times, June 1980.</ref>". Please footnote all your links except the one in External Links, and then check in back here. Don't start a new Request, just reply to this one and I or another editor will note it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Please approve of this page. The only way you can find out about Dtrix is by going onto Quest Crew's Wikipedia and clicking on his link, and it doesn't even lead to his own Wikipedia page, it leads to So You Think You Can Dance Season 3 Finalists's page
IQuestie (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Speedy-deleted as it was an article about a person but without footnotes to substantiate WP:Notability (music). MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
This is my first Wikipedia article, in draft form; I'll link to more internal Wikipedia pages but would like feedback on form, content, style, etc. Also, the sources I have aren't easily accessible online; is this okay?
Clara Walton (talk) 20:25, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sources are not required to be online; it's nice if they are, but not required. It becomes more of an issue on very contentious topics, where someone with an outlandish claim insists they've got a book that proves Point X is true. In your case, I don't anticipate much controversy, so just make sure you have nice clean footnotes, even if they don't have online versions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
latest changes made, please review... thanks!
Macomb13 (talk) 20:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I have updated the information according to previous suggestions made. I hope it is up to code. =) If so, how do I submit the page as a full-fledged wiki page?
Krogers555 (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Two main things: you have a good number of footnotes, but a lot of the sources seem a bit gray-area so far as meeting WP:Reliable sources. Can you maybe find at least one or two footnotes to an actual published book (check GoogleBooks) or relatively mainstream news publication that the average reader would understand to be outside of Graham's immediate community? You want sources that are clearly third-party and neutral, by people who have no personal/community bias in promoting Graham? Make sense? It's key for neutrality. The other issue is easier: your footnotes are "bare URLs", that is just a string of "http://www..." If the websites ever move, we'll have no idea what you're trying to link to, so please spell them out like so: <ref>[http://www.veganpress.com/grahamstory ''The Life of Graham'']. Vegan Press, 18 April 2003.</ref> The single-brackets make the title a clickable link. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:56, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Apart from imdb, i could not find any other information - but felt that this should be included - is this ok?
Crescent (talk) 23:22, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, film articles must have at least two references to reliable sources (not sure IMDB qualifies) to establish Notability. Not that the film is not literally "notable" itself, but Wikipedia requires verification of notability through published sources. That is, proof that somebody else took the time and interest to write about it in a formal setting. See WP:Notability (film) for details. To remove the risk of your page being Speedily Deleted as an unsourced film article, I've moved it to a draft on your Userspace so you can work at finding references for it at your own pace. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Crescent (talk) 23:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I wrote an article on x-fast tries, a data structure for storing integers from a bounded domain. I'd appreciate any feedback and a little help cleaning up the /to do subpage and moving the article into article space if it's ready. Mangarah (talk) 23:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)