Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 April 29

User:DEPsi_Proof/Delta Epsilon Psi
Hi this is informational page about my fraternity. I would like to know if this would be good enough to post up.

DEPsi Proof (talk) 01:53, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Got to get to bed, but the two main issues you face are that you don't substantiate Notability (organizations and companies), and your article relies entirely on Primary sources. The net result is the article ends up looking like a page for DEP, rather than about them from an objective perspective. I recommend you read the two policies I linked, and then figure out how to bring your article to those standards. Again, no rush and no worries, your article is safe on your Userpage for however long you need to get it into a strong position. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

High Tech High charter schools
I requested feedback on my userspace article a week prior to moving it to the main space (this date) but none was received. I have added more information, inline citations, and references and am open to any feedback that busy editors can offer. Thanks.

Architectsea (talk) 04:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Architectsea/John Stanford International School
I would appreciate input on form and content. This school is notable because of its unusual yet highly recognized international curriculum/program, its designation as an historic Landmark, and its award-winning facilities. Thanks.

Architectsea (talk) 05:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User:KatyOhara/Minthis_Hills
This is a new article on a previously unlisted subject. This is my first attempt at writing a wikipedia piece and before I go live I would like someone with more experience to give me guidance on any changes which they feel are required. Thank you

KatyOhara (talk) 06:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Greetings, the page has a number of issues you'll need to address. First and foremost, it reads like a tourism brochure; that is, a page for the business, not about the business. I advise you read some long-established WP articles about individual resorts to see how those are cleaned up for neutrality. Similarly, since it's a business, we need footnotes to evidence Notability (organizations and companies). I see you have some links at the bottom, but since those aren't WP:Footnotes to any particular point in the text, we can't tell what those are trying to prove. It will also greatly help your footnotes to format them as WP:Citations (author/title/publisher/date, with the link hyperlinked to the title), so that we can tell who made the statements you're footnoting. So a few things to fix. Don't be disenheartened, business articles are particularly hard to write, so you chose a tough topic for a first article. Are you also affiliated with this company? If so, you can still write the article, but you have to read WP:Conflict of interest, and place a statement on the article's Discussion page explaining your CoI. No need to add personally identifying information, but something like "I work in marketing for this company" or "I'm a relative of the owner of the resort," etc. Feel free to post back here with any questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Ironimp/carrstone
I have made the amendments as suggested apart from making this article more like the other 'stone' articles as I do not think this is what I am trying to acheive. I now feel that I need more help in making the necessary changes suitable for going up to mainspace. Perhaps the article is ready?

Ironimp (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Really strong overall, but lacks WP:Categories. I'd say if you add those you're ready to publish. If you want to really dress it up, you can add in "infobox", for example as seen on the right margin in this article: Feldspar. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Gaebler/Product_Development_Technologies
I would really appreciate some feedback on this article. Thanks in advance!

Gaebler (talk) 14:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Nicholasjameslowe/Universal_Secure_Registry
I have created this entry and would like feedback as to whether it is sufficiently objective. I have tried to be neutral and factual, but would welcome external feedback and constructive criticism.

Nicholasjameslowe (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Oscar Grossheim
Requesting feedback on my first article. Thanks for any assistance!

Der Bibliothekar (talk) 16:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You're a good 90% of the way there. The main issues are you have WP:Bare URLs in a couple of your footnotes, whic you'll want to turn into full citations (even if their not articles/books, do your best to mimic that format with the available info: title, date if known, hosting site/org). Also "Photography" is way too broad of a category; cats should be as specific as possible. Check out any established article on a famous photographer, and note what categories they use, and emulate those. That aside, all I'd suggest is running a search on GoogleBooks to add more info/footnotes to the article. There's a simply awesome auto-generator for WP footnotes at http://reftag.appspot.com, if you find a page of a book that makes a cool statement, or provides good academic evidence of claims in the article, just copy the URL off your address bar and plug it into Reftag (if you scrolled to a different page of the book, make sure the cite uses the right page number). Great work! I hope you'll stay on and find more old-school photographers you want to cover; those are especially cool since their work is out of copyright, so you can make a really visually impressive article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * EDIT: are you a speaker of German, or any other language? If so, I can show you how to replicate and link to your article on other-language wikis. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks so much for the advice. I will make the changes you suggested and go from there. Unfortunately I cannot claim fluency in German, but cheers for the offer. Der Bibliothekar (talk) 14:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

ASKA (band)
Would like have some feedback about my page from an editor. This was a very timely project and I hope I did everything I was suppose to. I have email with permissions for photo's and received an O.K. from Wikipedia member to upload them. Any help or approval would be greatly appreciated! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASKA_%28band%29 Thank You,

PennyPen (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Huh, you have an interesting mix of totally mastering some aspects of Wiki editing, and some areas where you're pretty far off-base. But not a problem, that's what we volunteer for. Absolute first things first, have you read WP:Notability (music). Make sure you read that all the way through, and assure yourself you have the independent, reliable, substantive sourcing to meet the standards. Next, you've gone pretty hardcore with the footnoting, but in most cases you're not actually doing what footnoting is for. You're using footnoting in place of wikilinking, that is, you're typing when all you want to do is type Heavy metal. The double-brackets will take someone right to the wiki article. Next, footnotes are for evidence, not "here's the article about Arizona/heavy metal/mango imports". What you want to do is go through your draft, and everywhere you're just trying to link an article, remove the "ref" tags and just put double-brackets around the word. Then, take a look at your footnotes and ask "is my footnote proving that what I typed is true?"  That is, if the phrase "in 1993, the lead singer was attacked by a rhinoceros." is footnoted to "Rocker Attacked by Rhino. Acme Press, January 4th 1993", then you're spot on. If it's anything different from that, you're not.  Right now it's hard to even judge the article with the trippy footnoting, so fix the footnoting and then post back here on this same discussion to let us know you're ready for the next step.  Good enthusiasm, and you're really diving into the coding, but you've gone a bit off the path. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi MatthewVanitas, Thank you very very much for helping. In the begining I did sooo much reading... frankly my brain was mush!! This is new and sort of confusing to me. I have no personal friends to really ask about the "how do I..." so again thank you! I read the article on Notability (music). I have cleaned up a bit and yeah... it's my first time. I am sure there are much better ways to code, but just wanted to do the best I could at figuring some of this out. Any help is so very much appreciated!!!


 * Don't forget to sign your posts each time on a Talk page by typing four "~", or hitting the Sign button at the top of your editing window. I've fixed some of the format issues, and added some maintenance tags IDing what you need to address. For the massive photos, scope out Image galleries for a smoother way to arrange those. Your footnotes right now aren't sufficient, as they prove little tiny bits of info "ASKA played at X concert", but don't provide substantive coverage. You need to find reviews (not on blogs/forums, but professional-type ones), news articles, etc. Also major tone issues: "this band is awesome and these guys thrash hard" is not encylcopedic. What is encyclopedic is "the band plays 200 gigs a year, has opened for Motorhead 28 times, and music critic Kenny Rockalot of the LA Times labeled them 'the roughest of metal monsters.' " Note the difference?  It's kind of like dating websites: don't say "I'm a fun guy", show it. Again, you do have to approach this from a neutral perspective, so make sure everything you type is inarguable: people can argue whether they rock hard or not, but they can't argue that K. Rockalot wrote such on the Living section of the August 1st 2007 LA Times.  Follow?  MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Tncscv/T3Leads
Please provide feedback on this article. Also, I would like to know how to get this article moved so it can be see by everyone. Thank you.

Tncscv (talk) 17:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Greetings, your article will be published once it meets all the requirements. At the moment, you have some formatting tweaks to do, but more importantly you have to meet the benchmarks of Notability (organizations and companies). Please read this policy, and understand what kind of sourcing you need to provide. What you need are multiple independent, reliable, substantive footnotes proving that your company has been covered in legit journalism or academica. Right now your only reference is to the company's own site, which you might guess doesn't provide the kind of neutral objectivity needed. Please read the Notability policy, then start adding footnotes from independent sources to verify the statements made in the article. If you don't know how to do Wikipedia's handy auto-listing footnotes, check WP:Footnotes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Phytalmia mouldsi
need help formatting references and external links Lauren Eubanks (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * With the references, I assume your question is "what do I do about repeated footnotes?" Your answer is found at WP:REFNAME. For external links, I've applied a format to your first EL, so just plug in author/title/publisher/date into that format, and you'll be good to go. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * EDIT: note also you need to fix your image licensing tagging for one of your pics; the image can get deleted if you let that slide, best to look into it promptly. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Fergus Walsh
Hi folks, I've just posted my first article, on the health journalist Fergus Walsh. I'd appreciate some (or a lot!) of feedback. Thanks.

Fulleraaron (talk) 21:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Good overall, but you need to turn your WP:Bare URLs into proper citations for legibility. The WP:Lede is rather spares; the intro paragraph should give a 2-3 basic summary of what the person is most famous for. And on a minor sidenote, reference tags should go after the punctuation marks. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:30, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Matthew, thanks for the points. I've now fixed all of them, and added some external links. One of them (to the charity) might be questionable as it might appear to be advocacy. I'll remove it if you think so, but that pending, can the 2 'issue' templates be removed? Thanks again.