Help desk
< July 18	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 20 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

July 19

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anthony Di Pietro

Hi,

I have created an article for review Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anthony Di Pietro.

There is another article that is totally incorrect under the same name (about the same person). How does this work?

Cheers, Sarahcarnovale Sarahcarnovale (talk) 01:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That works just the way you handled it: You edit the existing article and improve it. Unfortunately I'm not sure you've really addressed the notability issue the old article suffered from: While your sources certainly are reliable, many of them have little to say about Di Pietro, only quoting him as a de facto spokesperson. Reference no. 5, "FFA axe Gold Coast United", doesn't mention him at all. Notability requires sigificant coverage about him, not just a couple of passing mentions. Huon (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Sobujmolla/sandbox

Heading text

<gallery> #REDIRECT [[File:Example.jpg|Caption1 File:Example.jpg|Caption2]] {| class="wikitable" |- ! Header text !! Header text !! Header text |- | Example || Example || Example |- | Example || Example || Example |- | Example || Example || Example |} </gallery>

Do you have a question? Huon (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dumptruck (Voice Professional)

Hi,

I need help citing an article I wrote about a voice professional in the sport of Roller Derby. Much of the information was gained from a personal interview I conducted while he was commissioned to work for my Roller Derby League. I do, however, have three + additional sources (a blog interview, a news clip on youtube, and a number of social media pages). Albeit not the most scholarly of sources, they can be used to cross-check the information I included in the article. Now, I just need help with formatting. Any suggestions?

I also need help with making sure the picture(s) I uploaded meet the Wikipedia rules. According to what I read, they would be considered a part of the public domain...but could I get some clarification just to be safe?

thanks!

Mkhalgat (talk) 06:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC)Monique[reply]

Unfortunately none of the references given in the article are the reliable secondary sources we need to establish the subject's notability. Many of them are primary sources such as Stroupe's LinkedIn page, and none of the others come with the reputation for fact-checking and accuracy required to be cosidered reliable. DNN comes closest, but even if that were considered reliable, you couldn't write a article based on that source alone. The interview you conducted with him isn't verifiable at all unless it has been published. Thus you need more reliable sources, such as newspaper articles.

Furthermore, the article's text is unduly laudatory and uses weasel words. He is "celebrated" and "marked by his boisterous personality"? Says who? That would need not only a source, but attribution to a source. He is "know for his insight into Roller Derby"? By whom?

Regarding images: The images do not become part of the public domain by being uploaded to Wikipedia. If you hold the copyright, you can release them into the public domain, or you could release it under the CC-BY-SA free license. If there ca be any doubt about you holdig the copyright, or if someone else holds the copyright and you received permission to publish the images under a free license, it's probably best to follow the steps outlined at WP:Requesting copyright permission#When permission is confirmed. Huon (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Binary fission

Step of binary fission....???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.127.12.246 (talk) 09:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Huon (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review page

Could you kindly review Endangered Planet Foundation page as updates have been made. I believe it now meets Wiki standards. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StyleIcons (talk • contribs) 10:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That submission has been accepted last month; it's beyond this project's realm now. I agree that the issues have been addressed; when you did so, you could just have remove the maitenance template. I have now done so. Huon (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gregory Dickow

I need help to have this page pass as a Wiki page. It got 3 declines already but I think the references are now sufficient to pass the notability issue. I need help what more to do with the page. Help! Optijen (talk) 13:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the sources are all that good: The first four are primary sources, TV networks speaking about their own shows, and no. 6 is a press release, which is not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. Of the remaining sources, two are interviews with Dickow, and the last one, Hladky's article, only uses him as a source for a quote about prosperity gospel. No one but Dickow and his close associates talks about him to any significant degree. Conversely, all hard facts (such as Dickow's or his wife's birthday; the latter probably doesn't belong in the article on Dickow anyway) are currently unnsourced, and the secondary sources do not mention them.

While that's not as relevant as the lack of significant coverage in secondary sources, the draft also has problems with its tone. Take for example the very first sentence: Dickow's megachurch has "two thriving campuses." What does "thrivig" in this context mean, and who says so? A number of adherents or something like that would be much more informative - if you feel that such details should better be covered later in the article, that's ok too, but we still should not call the campuses "thriving" without a secodary source. And "He is one of the notable members of the Maranatha Campus Ministries"? Who says so, and what makes him notable? There are also some rather empty phrases. "Dickow is known to explain"? Known by whom? Why not "Dickow explains", or maybe just "According to Dickow, ..."? Huon (talk) 15:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vargo Companies article declined for copyright

Can we get any additional information on why Vargo Companies page was declined due to copyright. The presskit pdf used is not a copyrighted document. If it is truly viewed as copyright what is required from author to permit use on wikipedia page?

Many thanks, Art Eldred — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arteldred (talk • contribs) 14:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By default, everything is copyrighted unless it has been explicitly released into the public domain. If that's the case, you'll have to provide cofirmation; WP:Requesting copyright permission explains the process, especially the section on what to do when permission has been obtained. When you provide confirmation that the document (which seems to have vanished from the web) is indeed in the public domain, a clerk will add a note to that effect to the draft.

But since that document is a primary source and the article didn't show any significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the company (the secondary source is about waveless picking in general, not about Vargo; it does not even mention COFE, the system it's cited for), it might be easier to rewrite it from scratch based on what secondary sources such as newspaper articles have to say about the company. Otherwise it will be declined for a lack of notability. Huon (talk) 15:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HMS Mary (1677)

[[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HMS Mary (1677)]

Hello,

Having attempted to submit my first article (above-named) to Wikipedia yesterday, I am surprised to see that it has been rejected as "a blank page". I followed the guidance stage by stage and took notice of a dialogue on the very last page to NOT remove this textbox (or something to that effect) as it would NOT blank my submission.

I have now rechecked and resubmitted the article. However, I cannot establish that it has gone through correctly for review.

I would very much appreciate your assistance.

Thank you

AncientMariner1798 (talk) 17:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The version of the page that was declined was this one, which was indeed blank. I cannot tell what went wrong; anyway, I have now re-submitted the draft for review. That will take a few days. Huon (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copywrited Material

My submission has been denied because it states that my content is copywrited but I don't know how it is. Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eabrookman (talk • contribs) 19:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been deleted (the standard procedure for copyright infringements); I therefore cannot tell what copyright it violated. If you used a copyrighted source such as compay websites but had permission to do so (which would require the source to be released under the CC-BY-SA license, you will have to provide proof of that permission via the procedure outlined at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission#When permission is confirmed. Once permission has been confirmed, you the draft can be undeleted. But it might be easier to just paraphrase whatever source you used in your own words. Huon (talk) 19:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]