Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 January 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< January 3 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 5 >
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 4

[edit]

02:40:39, 4 January 2015 review of draft by TurntheHeart

[edit]


TurntheHeart (talk) 02:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately your instructions as to how to submit an article are about as clear as mud. Also the date thing for when I accessed the website that I am citing. I seem to be missing something.

@TurntheHeart: Did you see the green button on the draft that says "Submit your draft when you are ready.."? You press that. Don't bother, though, because Wikipedia doesn't need your meandering story about how you "searched both Wikipedia and Dictionary.com for definitions, I found none. I did a Google search on the phrase and actually found a rotary rasp wheel for sale on the grainger.com website". This is an encyclopedia. What you might do is try improving the article about rasps. You can't add links to businesses selling rasps; you have to use reliable sources. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! You have done a great job of making me feel like an idiot. By the way, I did press that green button, but there was nothing to clearly let me know that I had done so. I thought the purpose of this help desk was to help people improve their articles, but it seems that the primary thing you have done is to belittle me because as I have said previously, the instructions are not clear. That nice green button did not say "Click here to Submit". That would have been clear. As to your definition of a reliable source, I fail to see how a site that actually has a picture of a rotary rasp wheel is not a reliable source. I certainly have no interest in that company or the company that makes them, but it does certainly prove the existence of such a device. Yes, I wrote in a personable style, but that does not negate the fact that a reader of my article would have come away with some understanding of what a wheel rasp is. However, you seem only concerned with your opinion that nobody would appreciate my article. Well, though you do have a point about my style, I can tell you that I for one would have appreciated the information that I uncovered. Your comment that I should perhaps improve the rasp page really doesn't seem likely either seeing that the only source of proof that I have that such a device exist is a commercial one and therefore not reliable. I guess until I find a non-commercial site for information, I will have to keep the information that I have discovered to myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TurntheHeart (talk • contribs) 05:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TurntheHeart. Please don't give up! Wikipedia needs more and better articles about tools!
While Chris troutman could have been more diplomatic, unfortunately everything he said was true. People are constantly adding inappropriate material to Wikipedia, and sometimes the volunteers here become a little exasperated.
It seems that there are two issues to be dealt with before there can be an article about the "wheel rasp"
  1. An encyclopedia article should contain only dry facts about the wheel rasp (unlike a magazine article or a blog posting, for instance, in which the writer inserts his/her personality and opinion). This is easily fixed, and if you don't change it, someone else will, so it's not a serious problem in the long run.
  2. Wikipedia only has articles about topics that have been written about extensively by journalists or other authors. Just "existing" isn't enough for a topic to have a separate article - hence the suggestion to add to an existing page. However, it may be possible to find a number of references about the wheel rasp itself to cite if you check Google Books; books are usually reliable and independent (unless they are self-published by a tool company, for example). Here's one, and another, for example, showing that wheel rasps have been around for a long time, and there were several books with descriptions of how the tool was used in recipes long ago. Also, is this the same tool as a "rotary rasp"? There are lots of book references for that, such as this one. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:50:50, 4 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Naganata

[edit]


Hi,

After very useful input from Jimfbleak, I think my draft article on Ewan McLennan can go for assessment and (hopefully) release into the wild. How do I put it forward for that?

Thanks, Dave

Naganata (talk) 13:50, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Naganata (talk) 13:50, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dave (Naganata). I have submitted it for you. In the future you can submit a draft by adding {{subst:submit}} to the page. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:05, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:10:17, 4 January 2015 review of submission by Sguthery

[edit]


I have a new page pending approval. It is in my Sandbox and I think as a Draft. I'd like to start another page in my Sandbox but I certainly don't want to disrupt the approval process or lose the pending page. Should I just hold tight until the current page with whatever changes might be suggested in the approval process goes live or can I go ahead and start a new page in my Sandbox?

Thanks in advance for your guidance.

Cheers, Scott

Sguthery (talk) 15:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Scott. I would leave the sandbox alone for now. There's another way to work on several drafts at once. If you want to work alone at first, you can start a subpage in your user space, such as "User:Sguthery/Great new topic" by typing this into the search box at the top of the page. Wikipedia will tell you that there is no such page, and ask if you want to create it. If you are planning to work on the page with some other editors, you could instead start a page in Draft space, such as "Draft:Great new topic".
If you have trouble doing this, feel free to ask here or at the WP:Teahouse for more help. —Anne Delong (talk) 15:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Sguthery: I have removed the redirect coding from your sandbox, so you're free to reuse it. As Anne points out, you can create multiple sandboxes so you're not restricted to just your main one. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:15, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:13:32, 4 January 2015 review of submission by Kkpk091811

[edit]


Good day, I would like to asked what is the status of my first article on your website?

Kapampangan Ku Pagmaragul Ku (KKPK) International Inc. (talk) 19:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:40, 4 January 2015 review of submission by Lidanoir

[edit]


Lidanoir (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

just a few minutes ago I submitted a draft for a new article (here it is in my sandbox: User:Lidanoir/sandbox). Since I'm unfamiliar with submissions in the new format, I'm not sure if I did everything right and the article will be reviewed. When submitting my last (and first) wiki article, the formatting sheet was somewhat different and I got a confirming message. So please tell e: is my article there to be reviewed? I'm sorry if this may seem a somewhat stupid, over-eager question. It's just that I don't want my text to be lost.

Thank You & Best Lidanoir (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)  Done[reply]

  • Hello Lidanoir, a few technical problems:
  • You have copies of your draft at two different places:
  • Neither of them was actually submitted for review, so I submitted your sandbox, and then realized you had a separate draft under its actual title. Now both of them are submitted (which you can note by the large yellow box that appears at top or bottom of the page), so I suggest you choose whichever is actually the one you want reviewed, keep that one, and on the other one blank the page and put the code {{db-self}} at the top so an admin can delete it so you and we don't get confused by multiple copies of the same draft. In the future, make sure you never copy-paste an entire article to a new place, use the WP:Move tool instead, to avoid having extra copies floating around.
Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:53, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MatthewVanitas

Yes, helped a lot. I did as You recommended, cleared my sandbox & inserted the code. Thanks :) Lidanoir (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:27:29, 4 January 2015 review of submission by Gderrin

[edit]


I have created a page called Draft:Gderrin. It is a biography about a person with the name Victor McMahon. I think it should therefore be called Draft:Victor McMahon. I want to move it from my sandbox to an article space. (I do not need to have the article reviewed.) I have also created a user Victor McMahon which I want to delete but can't. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Gderrin (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gderrin, the problem is that you apparently had the page at Victor McMahon, but then you moved it to Draft:Gderrin, and now I can't move it back since Victor McMahon is a Redirect filling up that slot. But I've asked an admin to delete the placeholder redirect so we can move the actual article body to the right place. Your draft could use improvement, but McMahon appears to meet WP:Notability so I don't see a need to hold you up if you want it in livespace now. To delete any other page you've mistakenly created, just type {{db-self}} at the top and an admin will delete it for you. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2015_January_4&oldid=1118550804"