Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 December 29

= December 29 =

Page for Dr.L.Prakash
Hi

I had submitted an article on the above title twice. It got rejected both times and i am wondering what else i should do to get it accepted. whatever references i had was given in the article but I could not u'stand the way the reference had to be included in the article. can somebody let me know how to do it? also pls let me know why the article was declined so that i can rectify the errors and resubmit it/

thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumar 1975 (talk • contribs) 06:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The article's sources are insufficient. Most are simply links to the homepages of organizations that might have written about Prakash, but the homepages themselves don't mention him and cannot serve to verify what they're cited for. For example, a search for the Prakash article on FHMIndia.com produced no relevant results. There are only two sources mentioning him at all, and Outlook Magazine doesn't say what we claim it says. I'm not sure a "gossip" page is a good source in the first place. Many of the draft's claims are not supported by sources at all, while conversely several statements made about Prakash, for example the length of his prison sentence and the crimes he was convicted of, didn't make it into the draft.
 * A writer as successful as Prakash should have been the subject of greater news coverage than the draft currently shows. We should try and find some, and we should make sure that the draft's content is based on what the reliable sources actually say about Prakash. Huon (talk) 12:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

deleted article
I created, or began to create and article about my father Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Leslie McFarland. The response I got after I submitted the draft was that the page was deleted because I wrote an article about myself. How do I have the page properly read and vetted? Thanks.

JoAnne McFarland 50.14.88.23 (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I presume the page you are referring to is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Leslie McFarland (songwriter)? It was not deleted, it was declined for failing to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Having looked over the submission, I think there is enough info to show the subject is sufficiently notable, but you need to evidence this by improving the referencing -- see WP:Referencing for beginners. The links you have provided that link straight to other Wikipedia articles cannot be used and should be removed, per WP:CIRCULAR. Once you have improved the referencing, feel free to submit it for review again by clicking the link in the big pink template. Also, have a read of WP:IMPERSONATE for info on why the account name you chose may not be suitable for use on Wikipedia. Pol430   talk to me  23:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * If you're closely associated with McFarland, as your username suggests, you may also want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Huon (talk) 23:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Review of Articles for creation/International Online Film Critics&

 * Dear editors,

This is the page about a film award created in 2007. I was wondering how we can improve this page. It is already quite long and accompanied by reliable sources such as, for example, HitFix, Yes! Weekly, Filmweb and Dziennik Polska-Europa-Świat. How could I improve it in any way?
 * All the Best,
 * PassionFilm (talk) 21:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd say the draft could do with a little more coverage of the award itself. Most of it is a meticulously referenced list of past winners, but I couldn't find anything on which critics are polled or how they're chosen. And there are five nominees for each category of award; who chooses the nominees? Is there some sort of awards ceremony or a trophy, or is it just an online poll without any physical component?
 * On an unrelated note, Yes! Weekly probably isn't an independent source because the author of that article was himself one of the polled critics. It should serve for uncontroversial facts, but I'd probably de-emphasize it and remove it whenever we have another truly independent source making the same point.
 * A minor issue: You repeatedly write, "Instead the nominees were revealed..." I don't think you mean "instead", which would imply that something was not revealed and the nominees were revealed in that something's place. The draft could do with a little copyediting for grammar and readability, too. Huon (talk) 01:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, thank you very much... Your help was very useful to me ... I'll modify the page according to your advice! The only thing I'm not entirely agree with you is about Yes! Weekly that is an independent source, even if the critic said to vote in the poll. Also there is a page on the internet that shows the polled critics, but it doesn't seem a very good source. 87.11.81.135 (talk) 10:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)