Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 July 25

= July 25 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bright Blue (Organisation)
Hi!

My article draft Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bright Blue (Organisation) has been declined because it infringes copyright. The problem is that I am writing it on behalf of Bright Blue and that the content on the website has been written by us. We are just using the description we made of what we do to explain it on Wiki. How can we get around this issue? Help is very much appreciated. BrightBlueCampaignBrightBlueCampaign (talk) 05:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If somebody has asked you to write Wikipedia articles on their behalf, they've misunderstood what Wikipedia's about. You need to find reliable sources such as news articles that explain the company, and then wait for somebody not involved in the organisation at all (who hence can write with a neutral point of view) to create the article based on those. Anyone asking you to create a Wikipedia article is generally misguided. Hope that helps. -- Ritchie333  (talk)  10:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sally Steele (2)
Why is my article not being accepted? there are NO copyright infringements on this piece whatsover. Where EXACTLY is the copyright infringemnts?The article is for Sally Steele (2) (Rocksinnerqueen (talk) 06:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC))

Can you please send back what I have already written so I can fix what I already sent? I have type the piece over 5 times with revisions and I can't copy and paste. Please help! there is no reason why this shouldn't be published. I don't have any copywrite infringements. it is an original piece. For Sally Steele (2) (Rocksinnerqueen (talk) 06:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC))


 * I'm not sure about the copyright infringement, but you can check the history to see what was blanked. The declining reviewer would probably know the exact details.  We have only the summary.


 * There is no send back. Your article is always accessible, perhaps you just did not know the location.  It is located here:  Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sally Steele (2).   You may edit it as much as you like.   Thanks for your work.   :- ) Don  07:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You can find your article by clicking on this link. However, you need to add reliable third-party sources to the article otherwise it will be blanked again. The reason for this is simply that nobody else knows what you are saying is true unless you can provide a link to the source so we can all check it. I'd recommend putting this to one side for a while and starting on something simpler such as improving an existing article - for instance Ross Halfin isn't particularly well sourced and could do with additional references. -- Ritchie333  (talk)  11:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Submission doesn't appear on the Submissions List - Article John Gledden - Professional Tennis Coach
I have recently edited my article and saved /. resubmitted.

However I have not had the normal conformation and it isn't appearing on the Submissions page either.

What should I do.

Thank you

(Tennisbuff12345 (talk) 16:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC))


 * I can't tell what went wrong, but I've manually submitted it by adding to the top of the article.
 * The amount of sources is impressive, but one major issue remains: It's impossible to tell which part of the article is supported by which source. Take for example the first paragraph in the "Personal life" section: I haven't looked them up, but judging by their titles, none of the 2006 references seem likely to discuss the exploits of Gledden's children. You should clarify that by using inline citations and footnotes: Enclose the relevant reference in " " tags and put it right next to the statement it supports. That will produce a footnote which will automatically displayed by the reflist template in the references section. This is even more important for biographies of living persons than for other Wikipedia articles.
 * The draft also needs more copyediting, but that's just a style issue and isn't as important as the footnote issue. Huon (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John de Ruiter
My question is about secondary references. I have found numerous articles which originally appeared as posts on websites or in newspapers and magazines, but these now only exist as copies on other third party websites. Can these be considered true secondary sources if their original version or copy no longer exists in the public domain or in any archive?Planktonium (talk) 17:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * This depends on the circumstances. If the original source was reliable, such as a newspaper or magazine, it remains so even if it's no longer available online - newspaper articles tend not to vanish completely; libraries will have kept copies. There's also the Wayback Machine which archives web pages; pages so archived are usually considered as valid as the original. The cite web template has "archiveurl=" and "archivedate=" parameters for just this purpose. So far, so good. But if the original source indeed managed to vanish completely, isn't available offline, and the copies are hosted on websites which do not themselves have a reputation for accuracy, things get much trickier. I would try to rely on such sources as little as possible. Huon (talk) 19:32, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brian Worley (event planner)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brian Worley(event planner)

When will the article be reviewed? How long does it usually take and did I post it correctly? Juliette2012 (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. Yes, you did post your review submission correctly. There is currently a backlog of over 400 articles to be reviewed, so it may take a couple of days. Articles that tend to take the longest to review are those that are "borderline" notable ie: they have references, but it's not immediately obvious that they substantiate the content of the article. -- Ritchie333  (talk)  17:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Articles for creation/Tomasz Ciszewski
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tomasz Ciszewski

hello, i see you just declined my article, i don't know where i can put the links to be verify.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5065396/

http://www.filmweb.pl/person/Tomasz+Ciszewski-1794413Tomasz Ciszewski (talk) 19:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * In principle, you should add those links right next to the statement they support, preferably as a footnote: Enclose them in " " tags and have the footnotes automatically displayed by adding the reflist template to a "References" section below the article text. But IMDb is not considered a reliable source, and filmweb also seems to be user-submitted content. Neither source provides any details about Ciszewski. We require significant coverage in reliable sources to establish his notability. Furthermore, one of his films is only due 2013; Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and should be very careful when writig about projects that haven't yet been completed. If you are Tomasz Ciszewski as your username suggests, you might also want to have a look at our guideline on coflicts of interest. Writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged. Huon (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Songhor
Dear Editor: My submission Wikipedia talk:Article for creation/Songhor-Kolyaion July 21, 2012, has been denied. The stated reason is lack of reliable references. This is puzzeling to me, since I have included 5 very reliable refernces at the end of the article. Kindly advise as to what constitutes "reliable sources" so that I can improve my submission and get it ready for publication. Respectfully, Nsinai59 (talk) 19:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)Nader Simni


 * While the references given in the article certainly are reliable, it is unclear how they correspond to the article text. For example, the draft does not even mention the Medes, yet one of the references is an Encylopedia Britannica article on Media. I have similar doubts about many of the other references, too. Thus, the problem is not that the given references are unreliable but that they don't support the article text (and the two I can check online don't even so much as mention Songhor).
 * We already have an article on Sonqor; Songhor currently redirects thereto. For all I can tell, that's the same city. We should probably improve the existing article (with sources that actually support the content!) instead of writing a second one. Huon (talk) 20:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chandrika Balan
I have created an article Chandirka Balan. I want it ot be published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panank (talk • contribs) 20:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It is in the queue for review.  I would expect to take several days at this time.    :- ) Don  20:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of User:Millipede/sandbox
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David T. Killion I'm not sure whether I successfully uploaded a public domain (U.S. Department of State) photograph for a draft article on the U.S. Ambassador to UNESCO. I hope someone can offer advice so that I can accomplish this correctly and proceed, after review, to publishing the article. Thanks. Millipede (talk) 21:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You did upload the image to Wikipedia; I have added it to the draft. An image that's in the public domain could also have been uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard; it would still be usable at Wikipedia in just the same way, but the Commons is supposed to be the repository of free images, whereas Wikipedia itself also accepts non-free images if they are used under the doctrine of fair use.
 * The draft currently does not cite any secondary sources. We need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to establish Killion's notability. Maybe there are newspaper articles about him? Huon (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)