Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 March 22

= March 22 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Modulate
Hi,

This is the second time this page was rejected and I am puzzled as to the reason why. I have come across the pages below that have more or the same information as is in the page I have created. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Modulate

If these pages are different or follow the "acceptable" guidelines, can you please explain what it is so I have a better understanding and be able to fix this. The page I have created I feel is acceptable and is no different than these pages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_One

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grendel_(band)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Vampires

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_Goes_Cold

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_Girl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SITD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nachtmahr

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Syn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Module

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caustic_(band)

All the information is verifiable with the sources for this type of music as many of the references on all these are the same as in the one I created. In fairness if the page I created is being rejected for lack of information it would be only be fair for these pages to be deleted due to lack of information on theirs.

Thank you.

Sydirasky (talk) 00:05, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * First of all, each article is judged on its own merits so the existence of similar articles does not, unfortunately, make your submission any more or less likely to be accepted. However, I do think this guy might be notable but since I am on a tablet atm I can't do a full source check etc.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  03:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

My argument is based on the fact the sources I have used are similar to those that have been used by the bands on the other pages. In some cases there aren't even references or notes for them. I'm just frustrated because I have followed the guidelines to the best of my knowledge and as I've stated before the pages I've used as an example here are similar as far as information goes. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated because I'm trying my best here. Thanks!

Sydirasky (talk) 14:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I did some looking, and the band definitely appears to be notable, but your citations are so general, you have to dig to find anything, and some cites don't refer to the information presented. I fixed one citation so that it pointed to something useful, and fomatted another.  I think you need to review your citations, so that they backup what is said in your article, and you will be fine for approval.   :- ) DCS  15:56, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the help and advice!! Much appreciated! :)

Sydirasky (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I did a bunch of revisions and yet once again my page is rejected. Why? I have pointed out 10 pages within this genre of music that lack references or citations that are active pages in wikipedia that according to the "guidelines" should not even be on here. Again, my argument is based on the fact the sources I have used are similar to those that have been used by the bands on the other pages. In some cases there aren't even references or notes for them. I'm just frustrated because I have followed the guidelines to the best of my knowledge and as I've stated before the pages I've used as an example here are similar as far as information goes. Since the other pages that I have pointed out do not match Wikipedia's criteria, they should be deleted. I am trying my best here, to update and improve all pages belonging to a certain genre of music yet I am finding myself at a loss as to what is supposedly acceptable. Not only is the frustrating, but it is also discouraging and quite frankly annoying. I have spent countless hours researching to improve to what is supposedly "acceptable" and made changes to only have this rejected again. How many more pages do I have to point out as far as this genre of music goes that lacks the references and citations that are supposed to be acceptable only to look at and that they lack a majority of the information that my page actually has? I have asked for help, yet failed to receive any. I am doing my best here but like I have asked before, any help, notably any help by getting to the point of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Sydirasky (talk) 05:39, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kalahasti P. Prasad
Hi,

For draft article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kalahasti P. Prasad, the 2nd reviewer has declined acceptance citing lack of citations and footnotes. I actually used the ref toolbar to add citations and footnotes. Please let know the problem still present in the draft wiki tag document. Thanks,

Calahas Calahas (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Prasad certainly appears to be notable, however there aren't enough sources to back up and verify everything you say. For example, you say that he was "Head of Engineering College, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati", but there aren't any sources to back it up. If you can source some of his jobs and work, I believe this would be easily acceptable.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  19:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I understand the reason for the rejection. Unfortunately, there is no source available online to prove that he was the Head of the Electrical Engineering part of the Venkateswara University. I have contacted the University officials to provide me with offical information on the Head of College alumni list. But this may be a paper link. How can I use this link? I would think my existing sources are good enough to prove that the person is notable.

You have to understand that most Indian universities do not yet post content online. This is an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kailasa_Venkata_Ramiah. Kailasa Venkata Ramiah article has no sources (not even one) but it is known in the Andhra region that he was an educationalist. Same with this person.

I have also posted links to aggregations of his research output as well as citation indices of his output. Further the new and local engineering college which he headed has his name shown on a document as the Director.

What more kind of sources will Wikipedia need? The only other source I can add is to prove that he was a Humdoldt Fellow. By the way, since he was a Humboldt Fellow, this page has to be added to the list of Alexander von Homboldt Fellows which now has 27 alumni listed (will become 28 with new addition). Thanks a lot! Calahas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calahas (talk • contribs) 04:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello Calahas,
 * References do not have to be on-line in order to be accepted. There are many articles accepted with no on-line citations.  But, they must be "reliable" and able to be "verified", should someone desire to do so.  Even though Kalahasti P. Prasad seems to be very prolific in his work, I am not sure the he meets the requirement for notability in Academics.  Since I am not familiar with academics in India, if you could review the criteria at WP:ACADEMIC and verify  a specific item with citations that do not have to be on-line and may be from India, we can probably approve the article.   :- ) DCS  15:17, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Our Professor
PLEASE A BIG NAME AS OUR EMINENT PROFESSOR - WHO JUST DIED TWO DAYS AGO - A WORLD WIDE EXPERT IN " ENVIRONMENT" - DESRVES TO BE MENTIONED AS PERSON WHO HAS HIS OWN VISION IN THE FIELD. HE WAS THE COLLEAGUE OF PROFESSOR DR. MOSTAFA TOLBA- THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE UNDP FOR 15 YEARS- AND HE SHARED A LOT OF IDEAS IN THE AREA OF ENVIRONMENT IN THE WORLD LIKE THE TOPIC " DESERTIFICATION". QUESTION IS: COULD YOU ADD HIS BIOGRAPHY IN TEH WIKIPEDEA? THANK YOU

ADEL YASSEEN 41.35.169.36 (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC) Professor in Ain Shams University
 * Please direct the request to Requested_articles. Thanks. Kinkreet~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 10:24, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peekaboo Vintage
I do not fully understand why my article keeps coming back with this reason:"This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies." Peekaboo Vintage. I do not understand how to re-write my article to meet this criteria, please can you help.

(Rebeccalgreen (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC))


 * Please take a read at WP:NPOV and WP:SOAP. Best, B  music  ian  10:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/OC Securities
In regards to the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/OC Securities page I want to make sure I add the correct sources and references to prove the nobility of the page. As of right now the short page has 8 references. Does there need to be more references or do the references themselves need to be different? How do I know specifically what the administrator reviewing the page is suggesting me to do? Any help on this would be much appreciated. Thank you Jwaite87 (talk) 14:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * In addition to the standard 'decline' message, the reviewer has left a specific message requesting reliable sources. Generally you need to show more than one example of a independent, reliable source that discusses the subject in-depth (such as a news article in a recognised publication). There are currently no sources in your article that fit those requirements. Sionk (talk) 02:18, 23 March 2012 (UTC)