Help desk
< October 19	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 21 >

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.

October 20

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/indium wire

Hi, I see that my recent page was rejected due to no references. How do you reference some that was written in your own words? Thank you, Brian Gretz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpgretz (talk • contribs) 03:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see that my article was rejected due to no references. How do you reference your own words?

Thanks you, Brian GretzBpgretz (talk) 03:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know what you know? Where did you learn it? Did you read it in a book, in a magazine, online? Tell us where in the references section. If it's online, give a link to it. See Wikipedia:REF#What_information_to_include. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

could u please create a page with dstailed description of imudi mudaliar

could u please create a page with dstailed description of imudi mudaliar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.238.81.45 (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to request someone else write an article; the space for that is Wikipedia:Requested articles. Alternately, since there are many thousands of articles we should have and only so many authors, why not write the article yourself with others' help? For that, see Wikipedia:Writing your first article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Carruthers (New Zealand judge)

Can anyone help with this. I have corrected the two issues that concerned the first two editors - but to no avail. Offender9000 04:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Greetings, I took a look at it, though I wasn't involved in past reviews, and though I totally agree the article meets WP:Notability, I can't quite tell if you've met the other issue about not copying verbatim. I also have some concerns about WP:Original research in the article, and have noted that in comments at the top. There's also the issue of the article lacked a proper WP:Lead; it just goes right into his life chronologically, and lacks a basic summary section at the top that gives the absolute basics of his significance. I'll defer to the other reviewers for the moment on the phrasing issues, but I do recommend you read WP:Original research to make sure it hasn't crept into the article, and also that you top off the article with a standardised WP:Lead section. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Curranart/sandbox Newryabbey

http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Newry_Abbey&stable=0&shownotice=1&fromsection=Anlage_und_Bauten, Is there a way I can read what this man says on the link here, I cannot understand his language.Curranart (talk) 12:26, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The text at German Wikipedia? Have you tried using Google Translate? Also, while you're here I reviewed your article, and please be aware that WP:Original research is not admissible for Wikipedia articles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The one line in the section you link to says that no remains of the abbey survived the building measures of the 18th century. I could also translate the rest of the text, but it's not really worth it. The German Wikipedia's sources are all available in English anyway; German Wikipedia calls one of the sources "strange", another is a primary source and the third refers back to the German Wikipedia. You'd have to find better reliable sources anyway. Huon (talk) 22:37, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Masaki Kagesawa

Masaki Kagesawa is an awesome guy from Shoboki Island. He is smart and cool. He is very responsible, at the same time very friendly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masasama (talk • contribs) 16:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. You've given zero indication that this person meets the requirements of WP:Notability. Further, you've given no context whatosever (where is Shoboki? why is this guy worth reading about?). Please ready WP:Notability (people) to see if this person is someone who we need to have an article about. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:14, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly he knows more about my home town than I do. he does a lot of denying, this site needs to wake up !! everything in the world is not on the web to verify things!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curranart (talk • contribs) 22:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately Wikipedia's standard is verifiability, not truth. If some fact cannot be verified from reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it's unsuitable for Wikipedia. If a topic has not received significant coverage in such sources, it's considered not notable enough for an article of its own. Huon (talk) 23:37, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Saulschwartz/sandbox

Hi I'm not sure I followed the right procedure for asking for a review of the transfer of text in my sandbox to Wikipedia.

There is a page at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Carleton_University%27s_School_of_Public_Policy_and_Administration

The text in my sandbox is intended to replace that text.

So after entering the new text in my sandbox, I requested a review and entered some text (like this) explaining what I was trying to do.

Is that right?

Thanks

Saulschwartz (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)saulschwartz[reply]

You may simply edit the article Carleton University's School of Public Policy and Administration. Since you have done the work in your sandbox, it would be a matter of cutting and paste the information into the article. There is not a need to go through AfC as this is for new articles. I will remove the submission template from your sand box. If you have problems with adding your infomation to the existing article you can seek editing help or leave a note on my talk page. -- :- ) Don 18:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article declined due to no reference

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Indium Wire

Hi, I read through the beginner guide for references but I am still wondering how to provide a reference in an article for someone's own words? Meaning words that are from the persons experience in the field.

Thank you for your time,

Regards, Brian GretzBpgretz (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requires published sources such as metallurgy textbooks or scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals. Personal experience is considered "original research" and is not acceptable on Wikipedia (unless you have published your experiences, and even then there may be a conflict of interest if you try to heavily rely on sources you wrote yourself). This is important to make sure our readers can verify our articles' content: If you and I add conflicting claims to an article and both claim to be experts in the field but don't back up our additions with a published source, how can readers who aren't experts themselves tell who is right and who is wrong?

As an aside, there's already an Indium article. It might be better to improve the current article (with sources, of course) and not to write a content fork that discusses the properties of Indium under a different title. Huon (talk) 22:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Aurora Gabriele Murdock

I am trying to write this article, Aurora Gabriele Murdock, but was denied because of lack of references. I have paternity docs, st john hospital birth record, state of california birth certificate, baptism certificate and ucla dermatology newsletter. Will any of these qualify for valid references. If so, how would I cite them? Nucleararms (talk) 22:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any of your proposed "sources" provide the significant coverage we require, I strongly doubt many of them have been published and would thus allow our readers to verify their content, and I don't think they would be closely related to the draft's current content anyway. We need reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles. The LA Times article is just the kind of source we'd need, but it doesn't mention Aurora Gabriele Murdock. I doubt a child that isn't yet two years old is likely to be notable on its own; if her parents are notable, it seems more promising to add a short note about Aurora to their articles - with an independent source that mentions her birth, of course. Huon (talk) 23:18, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOTINHERITED for some criteria. -- :- ) Don 23:24, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]