Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 March 29
What do you think of this page?
Bryanbecker (talk) 01:40, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- As best as I can tell, it's a bit in the gray area as to meeting referencing requirements per WP:BLP; articles about living people have very stringent evidence requirements to avoid inaccuracy and libel. Can you find more footnotes from clearly-established news sites (see WP:RS)? I don't know martial arts that well, so strongly suggest you drop into the Discussion page (click the Discussion tab at the top of the page) for WP:WikiProject Martial Arts, and get some advice from them as to how best to find reputable information sites for martial artists. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Suggestions on how to improve appreciated, plus pointers on dealing with a destructive editor vandalizing the article.
Selkie72 (talk) 01:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Glancing at the History tab, I'm not seeing any "vandalism", but it appears there's another interested editor who has a different perspective on the issue and is changing the current/tone of the article. That is something you'll need to address, but definitely do limit accusations of "vandalism" to actual cases of inserting patent nonsense, chopping out chunks of text with no explanation, inserting obscentities, etc. People adding or removing content that you like or don't, especially when they're providing their own references, is a difference of opinion, not vandalism. You can use the Discussion page of the article to address any concerns you have and reach a consensus with the other party. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I wasn't sure what else to call it, since they're making statements and not backing them up, and their references aren't verifiable (at least for me--the link is behind a password and there's no citation information), and they've been removing my comments and references wholesale. Selkie72 (talk) 17:25, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Message their individual page and ask them to come to the page's Discussion to explain; talk it out there. If you feel you're being reasonable and following the right steps, but the other party is not, take it to the Administrator's Noticeboard. But make sure that you do not fall afoul of pushing only one side of the story, engage in hostilities, or get in an edit war, or it makes it hard for an admin to identify a "good guy" and the page may simply be frozen until tempers cool. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for your help! I've sent them a message, so hopefully we'll get it straightened out. Selkie72 (talk) 14:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Could I have some feedback on my page called "Gabriel Wilensky"? Wilensky has had a notable career in software, and for people looking for history on software he has been involved with, like Morph, the page is notable, as well as for history of acquistitions of software companies. His recent book is a significant one one the issues of history of anti-judaism,history of antisemitism, and history of holocaust.Nrglaw (talk) 04:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Nrglaw (talk) 04:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Greetings, article needs neutral, third-party references to establish notability. Please see WP:NOTABILITY. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure how to work with the article editing - there is still more info available online for the artist, I just couldn't believe there is no Wiki page for them and thought I'd start one, but I am struggling a bit.
Zianpanda (talk) 10:36, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- See reply to Free Flight Band below; article fails to establish WP:NOTABILITY. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Please help me out by reviewing this article and making any suggestions. Thanks!
Evaneaston (talk) 13:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Made some basic changes: bolded first occurrence of title term, wikilinked a few technical terms, removed in-line external link, added WikiProject to Discussion page, added categories. Looks good. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm new to this, but I've added as many reliable citations and sources as possible. I think the article is ready to go live now.
CclaytonWIKI (talk) 15:43, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, This is a new article (and my first article). I would like to know if I've met all of the criteria to avod deletion. Thanks!
Goodneighbours (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed bare footnote links using Reflinks; added categories. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Like many, I am new at this. I would like to know if my article fits the requirements, and is properly documented. Thanks
Jrobinson37 (talk) 16:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Definitely not ready; your article fails to establish notability (WP:NOTABILITY) using neutral, thirdy party references (WP:RS). Basically, we need evidence that somebody other than affiliated parties or friends are talking about this band and its importance. Not Facebook/Myspace, not blogs, not forums. Coverage from established, serious musical industry publications. Articles for a person or organisation which do not clearly establish notability are deleted immediately upon entering article-spaces, so please keep your draft on your personal work page until such references can be added. Please read the two policies linked for an idea on how to proceed. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Travis and I've been having some difficulty getting feedback on an article for Disney Second Screen. I've created a draft of the article in my user space, posted the suggestion on the Wiki Project Disney talk page, and also tried posting it on the drawing board. It's been a few weeks since I first posted these requests, and I have not had any luck receiving feedback. Disney Second Screen is already out on the Bambi Diamond Blu-ray/DVD, and it will also be included in the release of Tron: Legacy on Blu-Ray/DVD. Because of my potential conflict of interest, I would like to get feedback on this yet-to-be created article. Thanks, and I look forward to a response.
User space draft: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:TravisBernard/Second_Screen
Wiki Project Disney talk page: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disney#Disney_Second_Screen
Wikipedia Drawing Board: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Drawing_board
TravisBernard (talk) 17:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Appears to meet WP:Notability in that it provides significant third-party media coverage (USA Today, etc). I'd go ahead and move it to article-spaces; however, you need to add Categories at the bottom. Please make sure you add the most specific categories possible. So not just general ones like "Art"; categories should be narrowly targeted. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. I'm going to do some spelling and grammatical checks, plus add the categories before posting. --TravisBernard (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Does my Wiki need more content? Also -- how do I add a link to http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Lennox_International where it says ". Lennox Industries is a subsidiary of Lennox International Inc. (NYSE: LII)." I'd like to hyperlink "Lennox International Inc. to it's Wiki page.
Thanks!
VizIA (talk) 18:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- To wikilink a term, put double brackets around it: [[wikilink]]. Note also that any article about a person or organisation must have neutral, third-party references to establish WP:NOTABILITY, or it is subject to deletion immediately upon being released as an article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Want feedback on whether or not this is ready to be posted or able to be posted.
Deltaphizeta (talk) 19:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Definitely not ready; see Free Flight Band a few entries above. Ariticles about a person or organisation must have neutral, third-party references or they are speedily deleted upon submission. You're also going to want to change your username, as it's a conflict of interest to have the same name as an issue you're covering. Not to be rough on your or anything, it's just that you're really not supposed to cover your own group, so there are a lot of pitfalls involved in disregarding that advice, not the least of which is that your article will also eventually contain any negative information that occurs about your group. Note below caveat. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- 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.
Please review my first wikipedia article. Any feedback/suggestions appreciated!
Javajunkiewa (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I welcome any comments, tips and feedback on this article. Your expertise especially on whether my sources are sufficiently reliable would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Cchucks (talk) 20:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- A few things: I'm not sure how notability is judged for video games, so suggest you swing by Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games and get some technical advice. Off the top of my head, there's too much description of the backstory and game mechanics, vice the notability of the game, but I'll defer to the WikiProject for videogames there. You also need to unify your references; notice how a lot of your foonotes are repeats? Check out WP:REFNAME for info on how to make similar footnotes group together for cleaner layout. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Please review this new article. Thanks!
173.49.72.38 (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Cool article, but the main housekeeping that needs to be done is to spruce up those unsightly footnotes. For GoogleBooks footnotes, plug the link into this engine, and it'll give you a proper citation to sub in: RefTag. For any non-GoogleBooks links, use WP:REFLINKS to convert them to proper, full citations. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I was hoping to get some feedback on my article in terms of 1. Writing Style. How does my article sound to you? 2. Headings. Do you feel the headings are appropriate? 3. Citations. 4. Anything else I can improve on.
Thanks
Samiam121 (talk) 23:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Footnoting is well done, formatting decent overall. Main thing is that it needs Categories applied ASAP. That and the paragraph structure in the first few sections is rather choppy; too much like congolmerated groups of sentences rather than an organised flow of paragraphs. But overall a neat article addition. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)