Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 June 13
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < June 12 | << May | June | Jul >> | June 14 > |
| 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. |
June 13
[edit]I am needing to know what is a valid reference. I have used the templates and entered links that offer information about my article and it keeps getting declined. Can someone please tell me what I'm doing wrong, or if I am in need of a different reference type. The page in question is Johnny A McDowell. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnnyAMcdowell (talk • contribs) 01:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- Valid references are reliable secondary sources such as newspaper articles. Your draft's reference, a Waco Tribune-Herald article, is indeed such a source. But we require significant coverage in such sources to establish notability, and a single article in the local newspaper is usually not considered "significant coverage". Furthermore, the draft surrently has some content that's not supported by the Herald-Tribune article at all, such as the name of McDowell's wife or the horticulture degree. My suggestion would be to find more similar sources to clearly establish McDowell's notability, and to remove those parts of the draft that aren't supported by the sources. Huon (talk) 02:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights (WGNRR)
[edit]Was wondering how to insert a box on the right hand side with summary information and a photo as you see on many pages?
Thanks! Tarajp (talk) 03:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Tarajp
- I believe this has been resolved; you have already added an infobox. More help on infoboxes is available at Help:Infobox. If the image you want to add is non-free content, then please do not add it until your draft has been accepted; Wikipedia accepts fair use only for articles, not for drafts. Huon (talk) 11:13, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
can you add the photo of robbie jones screenwriter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.196.0.56 (talk) 16:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- What that article needs right now is not a photo, but reliable secondary sources to establish Jones' notability. Two of your current references seem to be individuals, not publications, and they are primary sources and will probably be rather annoyed if a bunch of Wikipedia readers mails them and asks them to verify the article's content... The gallery is also a primary source, but maybe there's some news coverage of Jones and his work?
- Regarding the photo: You can request an image to be uploaded at Wikipedia:Files for upload. You must provide licensing information so we'll know the image does not violate copyrights. Once an image has been uploaded, it can be added to the draft; the picture tutorial explains how to do so. Huon (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
פעם פעם לפני שנים רבות ,אתמול זויינתי בתחת — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.117.118.245 (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- Unfortunately we cannot accept an article on this subject if there are no reliable sources discussing it. See also WP:NFT. Also, it might help if you wrote in English on the English Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
This is the 2nd submission of I've made, and it was rejected for:
'more in article ref tags, and more links to other Wikipedia pages'
In this 2nd submission, I did much research and added all the references available, including Wikipedia(I've googled to check this). It would be a real shame, as it's an important part of Clonmel's history and was the largest such establishment in the South of Ireland at it's time.
Can you help at all, as there is no more I can add?
Thanks,
Dave — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.167.5.6 (talk) 17:11, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- That draft is a rather strange mish-mash. I assume it's supposed to be about the coach-building company; then the section about the history of the factory premises and about the founder's private life are off-topic and should be removed. The former's sources do not even mention the company. Furthermore, while the National Library of Ireland surely is a reliable source (and that probably includes its publications on Flickr), the paragraph about the photos seems more concerned with discussing the source itself than reporting what it tells us about the coach builders. Many of the other external links do not provide any kind of significant coverage - often it's no more than a passing mention of the name "O'Gorman".
- My suggestion would be to get rid of all the off-topic stuff whose sources do not mention the company at all, to turn those external links which represent reliable source that provide more than just the name into footnotes, to remove the others, and to emphasize what reliable sources we do have. If we're truly lucky we can find some 1920s or 1930s news coverage - I'm pretty sure the labour dispute that was discussed in the Dáil was reported on, but finding those reports will probably be non-trivial. Huon (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello
Sorry to ask such a basic and stupid question. I have been trying to submit this page for review, but I keep getting the message that it hasn't been submitted.
Would you be able to tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks
Papinian123 (talk) 20:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- It has been submitted; that message is outdated and will soon be cleaned up by an automated bot. As long as there's a message saying "Review waiting" and the page is categorized as "Pending AfC submissions" (the very last line), everything is ok. Huon (talk) 21:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- I've accepted your article. It had several strong news sources to establish the firm's importance. Sionk (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I edited the article and I have the photo -- can you look at it - it's got all the references - london jones — Preceding unsigned comment added by London jones (talk • contribs) 22:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- Individuals are not "references". Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable published sources that the readers can look up. You cannot expect our readers to mail random people for a confirmation of the article's content. I just searched the museum and gallery websites for any hint of Jones and came up empty. Searches via Google and Google News produced an actor of the same name, but nothing even remotely resembling a reliable source on the screenwriter. I'm sorry, but I don't think she's notable enough for a Wikipedia article. You might also want to read our guideline on conflicts of interest; writing articles on close relatives is discouraged. Huon (talk) 22:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shawn McMillan
[edit]Hello,
Can any one give me advice on how to get this article approved? I have resubmitted the article with a few changes in order for it to get reviewed but it seems like it has not been reviewed ever since the first time I have submitted it. Any help would be great!
Thank you
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shawn McMillan
The reviewer left the following comment about this submission:
- This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
Okirondesign (talk) 23:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- It may take some time until the draft is reviewed; there is a massive backlog of about 800 articles awaiting review. Please be patient.
- I don't think you have addressed the last reviewer's concern. Of the sources given in the article, most only mention that McMillan is the attourney in some case and cite some McMillan quotes about the case. That's not the significant coverage required to establish notability. The last reference is a press release, not a reliable source. YouTube is not a reliable source either, and the various clients' websites do not even mention McMillan. There are no secondary sources discussing McMillan himself. If he's notable only in connection with Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick v. Orange County Social Services, et al, WP:BLP1E suggests that we may be better off with an article on the case, not on McMillan. Huon (talk) 23:45, 13 June 2012 (UTC)