Help desk
< January 22	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 24 >

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.

January 23

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/T-TRAK

I have added references showing that the things alleged are actually being done. Since there is a page Model_railway#Layout_standards_organizations which references different ways of setting up model trains and this is a space-efficient way of enjoying a hobby with others. Is there anything else I need to do to get this article approved? ~~Joecyclist~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joecyclist (talk • contribs) 01:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those references are all to primary sources closely connected to the subject. To show that it's a notable standard, you'll have to show that it has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, such as news coverage or reviews in model railroading magazines. Unfortunately the Rail transport modelling article itself is problematic in this regard as well, and it's tagged for exactly this problem. But that's not an excuse to create other problematic articles; each submission must stand on its own merits. Huon (talk) 02:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PHLEBOTMIST TO PATIENT RATIO

i WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS THE TYPICAL DURATION FOR THE VENIPUNCTURE PROCESS? 107.8.21.20 (talk) 13:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC) ie; DAILY PHLEBOTOMY SCHEDULING....WHO MANY MINUTES BETWEEN PATIENTS ON ANY GIVEN SCHEDULE. ie; 8:00AM IS 1ST APPTOINTMENT TIME. WHEN SHOULD THE VERY NEXT PATIENT BE SCHEDULED WHEN ONLY 1 PHLEBOTOMIST IS AVAILABLE FOR THE ENTIRE 8HOUR DAY?[reply]

This page is for questions about articles submitted via Articles for creation. You can ask general questions at the reference desk, but this question is probably not appropriate for Wikipedia. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Parsons Paris

In waiting for my article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Parsons Paris to be reviewed, I want to highlight my concern with the "name already exists warning." I believe this warning refers to the article Parsons Paris School of Art and Design which is actually no longer affiliated with the Parsons Paris I am describing in my article. Will this still be a problem in the articles review? Mickeyallen (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When your article gets reviewed, the reviewer will allocate a different name to it, such as Parsons Paris (college). They may also choose to create a disambiguation page so people can get to the right article. It's nothing for you to worry about. As regards your article, while tertiary education colleges tend to be inherently notable (see WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES), I'd see if you can find a few more reliable sources like the New York Times source, as it will increase the chances of the article passing. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]