Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 October 17

User:Acprail/ACP_Rail_International
Worked on adding references, can someone tell me if my article is ready to go live? Acprail (talk) 00:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A few quick comments:
 * I took the liberty of fixing the history section format to meet Wikipedia's {{WP:MoS|Manual of Style]].
 * References should be inline. For example when an article makes a claim that is likely to be challenged you should have a cite right after the sentence. Simply having a reference section at the end is not good enough. You as author are responsible for making sure claims are substantiated. When you say" "Since 1994, ACP Rail International has been the specialist marketing company that European, British and other world railways have turned to for distribution, sales, strategy and marketing expertise." I as the reader shouldn't have to dig through the three references at the bottom to verify the claim; I should simply have a footnote so I know exactly which page makes that claim. Speaking of references you should reliable references to back the claim which aren't primary references. Two of the references in the section only mention ACP in passing the third source seems to be either an advertisement or at least reads like one.
 * You should avoid having a long list of eternal links. Facebook and twitter links are definitely not appropriate.

Hope this helps some. VictorianMutant (talk) 01:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Adrian-from-london/Biofield energy healing
Hi,

Based on feedback from user SPhilbrick in section 10 of my talk page I changed the article and I think it's ready for publication. Can you have a look at it please.

Many thanks,

Adrian-from-london (talk) 00:51, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Substantially improved from the first version I reviewed. Careful readers will find a number of things to challenge, and I haven't closely reviewed the refs to make sure they always support the claim, but I'd say it is ready to move to main space. If you know how to do that, go for it, if not, let me know and I'll do it for you.


 * One item I saw before, but forgot to mention, you have a bare link attached to "gut" in the intro section, it would be good to convert that to a proper reference. Nice job.-- SPhilbrick  T  21:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Conjunctival_Suffusion
Ekmadden (talk) 06:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This is barely more than a dictionary definition, maybe not even that. It may be that an encyclopedia article can be written, but it requires more references, and more "meat".-- SPhilbrick  T  21:54, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Integrity_Watch_Afghanistan/Integrity_Watch_Afghanistan
Hello, we would like to add a page about the work IWA does to spread in parts the methodology implemented to monitor integrity but would like to avoid any advertising style - could you please have a look and let us know what you think and whether it is ready to go live?

Thank you!

Integrity Watch Afghanistan (talk) 08:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * First off, I might recommend changing your username, as your current one violates the username policy by having a company name as the account name; accounts should represent an individual person. Secondly, you obviously do have a conflict of interest. Lastly, it does need significant work to ensure with the neutral point-of-view policy; it reads like an advertisement. -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 02:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Roy_Mankovitz_Biography
Hello, I am looking for feedback on the layout and usability. Are there any issues? I've had trouble listing the references (footnotes) even though I've created links throughout the article.

Also, I have been unable to find the article when I or a colleague searches for it. How does one upload a picture?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

PlanABrand (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That isn't the way we do references. See Referencing for beginners for help.
 * Wikipedia articles should follow a standard layout - see Article Layout for discussion.
 * Check the bios of other scientists or engineers to get a sense of the typical style of a bio.
 * For helping adding a picture, see WP:Images
 * Articles in user space (where it is now) are deliberately not indexed. This means someone looking for your draft needs to know the exact location to find it. This is intentional. When it is ready for main space, and moved to main space, it can be found in the index on the following day.-- SPhilbrick  T  22:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Hendrick Jacobs Falkenberg
I've created a new article on an early New Jersey settler who was the foremost language interpreter in the province at the end of the 17th century. He has an extensive progeny in the south.

Sarnold17 (talk) 19:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Overall, this is quite good. I see that you aren't brand-new, and now that I look, I see you are the one who did so much on the Stukeley Westcott article.


 * I have a couple of comments, but nothing truly substantive.


 * You have a longish quote in the Lazy Point section (364 words). In many cases, a quote comes from a source under copyright, so we have to be very careful about length, from a fair use standpoint. However, this source is PD, so that concern is moot. Consequently, we don't have to worry about the length for that reason, but we do generally want the quote to be "tight" for other reasons - this is supposed to be our summary of the biography of the subject, and while well-worded quotes add a lot of spice to an article, we ought to avoid using too much. I like your subsequent point, that this is an excellent description of the log cabin. Consider whether the quote could be shortened. One possibility to end after "corner" on the argument that the description of the cabin is the main point, and it ends there. However, I recognize that the beginning and end are natural beginnings and ends of an anecdote, so another possibility is use f ellipses to shorten the quote, while retaining the main substance.
 * My other comment is even more picayune. You use the Danckaerts reference three times. Once, of course for the quote, a second time in the Early Life section, presumably to support the claim he was from Holstein, and a third time following the second sentence. I'm not entirely clear why it is used as a reference in the second sentence. If you want to support the claim he is form Holstein, then it is in the wrong place for two reasons. First, it is acceptable to omit references in the lede, as long as the lede summarizes points made in the main body, and the points are referenced in the main body (though practice varies). This is you are trying to support the Holstein claim, you can do it in the Early life section and not bother doing it here. If you want to support it in the lede, it should follow the first punctuation after the claim. Again practice varies, and it is often acceptable to add a reference at the end of a sentence, but in this case it isn't obvious what is being referenced. The placement suggests it is supporting the second part of the sentence, but I don't believe it is. His wife is mentioned, but only in passing.-- SPhilbrick  T  21:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for you comments! I'm well aware of the source problems.  I think I'll just get rid of the lede citations, as I've discovered by reading some excellent articles that they are not needed.  I'm still working on this article, and making lots of little changes.  Concerning the length of the quoted text, I'll take a look at it to see what I can crop out.  It kind of tells a story, and I liked it in its entirety, but perhaps I can wittle down to something a bit more succinct without losing the thrust of it.  I greatly appreciate your input.Sarnold17 (talk) 00:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Aed5209/Petroglyph_Beach_State_Historic_Site
Anyone know anything else or know of picture available?

Aed5209 (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)