Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 October 5

= October 5 =

Proper sources?
I asked a question a couple days ago about changing the title of my submitted article (which is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SwiftKey) and I was told to look over my sources and find some new ones. I now have a couple of follow up questions. First of all, I would like to keep the xkcd reference in the article because I feel like it is a notable piece of information. How should I reference it as a source? The previous response to my question stated that it "doesn't really come with editorial oversight." My second question is about using the official SwiftKey page as a source. In the opening section I briefly discuss TouchType, the company that created SwiftKey. The source I use is swiftkey.net. Is it okay to keep this reference, or do I need to find a secondary source that discusses the company? I feel like this is the best place to get information about the company, but if necessary I will search for a secondary source. Thanks for your help.G what (talk) 01:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by G what (talk • contribs) 01:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The company's own website is an appropriate source only for truly mundane facts, and should not be used for anything remotely questionable. But for those mundane facts, it's fine, although it doesn't demonstrate notability. As for xkcd, it's a fine source for the fact that swiftkey was mentioned on xkcd. Whether that should be mentioned at all is another issue, but not one that has any bearing on acceptance of the article. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Evolution
What happens if evolution was not possible by that time? And what does Evolution mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.94.125 (talk) 02:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try  for an article related to the topic you want to know more about.  I hope this helps. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Bathurst 1000
Whom & what is the highest grid starting position winner of the Bathurst 1000? Pete4star Pete4star (talk) 05:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try  for an article related to the topic you want to know more about.  I hope this helps.  Huon (talk) 09:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jean-Paul Herteman
I am aware that I might have been a bit too hagiographic for my article...

Mayvbe he was too long, too detailed...

I tried to remove unnecessary details and made the article "drier"...

In particular I removed the Internationale section which needs more work and which might be added later in case it is appropriate...

Maybe Jean-Paul Herteman does not deserve more than 5 lines, or ??

I would like to get some advice from experienced reviewers...

Thank you in advance for your help. Euroflux (talk) 09:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd get rid of most of the vast collection of external links. I haven't checked them all, but at a glance they seem a collection of anything and everything that mentions Herteman by name. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, and external links should serve some purpose. His employer's official biography or a personal website might be worth it, but half a dozen video interviews not so much. The references, meanwhile, could be improved. Only the Le Figaro article is a reliable secondary source, all others are either dubious or by organizations Herteman is affiliated with. That's not even sufficient to establish his notability. If some of the current external links are indeed reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of Herteman, they should be turned into proper references and the article should profit from them. Huon (talk) 11:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Justin C. Hamilton (Basketball)
Justin C. Hamilton (J-Ham) (born December 19, 1980 in Sarasota, Florida) is an American Professional Basketball Player.

A four year starter who was the state of Florida's class 4A player of the year as a senior in 1999. Also, a 2-time All-state player and runner up for Mr. Basketball.
 * High School

Justin Hamilton played basketball at UF from 1999-2003, where he was known as a great lockdown defender. He helped lead the Gators to four consecutive NCAA appearances.
 * College

A starter since his freshman season, Hamilton helped lead the Florida Gators to the NCAA Championship game in 2000. Also, helped lead the Gators to two Southeastern Conference (SEC) Championships in 2000 and 2001. The Gators were Eastern Division Champs in 2002. In 2003, the Gators were ranked #1 in the country for the first time in school history.

Known for running the point smoothly and contributed as he was best suited, playing tight defense and distributing the ball around (he led the team in assists 39 times during his UF career). His college stats reflected his well-rounded game: in Florida's all-time record books, he finished his career ranked sixth in steals with 164, eighth in steals per game, and eighth in assists with 309.

Considered one of the top perimeter defenders in Europe, Hamilton has played on many elite European teams (Euroleague or Eurocup), winning several cups and championships.
 * Pro Career


 * NBA Summer League
 * Detriot Pistons, Portland Trailblazers 2003
 * New York Knicks 2004
 * San Antonio Spurs 2005


 * Championships
 * NCAA Runner-up 2000
 * Southeastern Conference Champion  2000, 2001
 * Southeastern Conference Eastern Division Champion 2002
 * Spanish ACB Champion 2005
 * Belgium BLB Champion 2008,2009,2010,2011


 * References


 * External links
 * http://www.gatorzone.com/basketball/men/bios.php?year=2003&bio=hamilton.html
 * http://www.alligatorarmy.com/2011/8/12/2357468/the-gator-vault-justin-hamilton
 * http://ethiasleague.webpont.com/en/statistics/players/?id=A23378
 * http://www.euroleague.net/competition/players/showplayer?pcode=CSW


 * That's a copy of your article. What do you need help with? Huon (talk) 11:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I reviewed that article recently. We discussed it on my talk page, and, besides the person who is writing is its Justin C. Hamilton's wife, I considered that the article was not citing proper sources. I think it has now one secondary source confirming the notability: : "One of those newcomers, Hamilton, figures to be Kijewski's floor general. He boasts outstanding athletic skills that have helped to earn his reputation as one of the best defensive guards in Europe. He will have plenty of running mates in the backcourt.". Jorgecarleitao (talk) 17:08, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naz Shahrokh (2)
Hello, I recently had an article refused because not only did I correct a previously refused article, but I also went back and made an addition latere Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naz Shahrokh (2) It was therefore submitted twice and the reviewer didn't know which one was the definitive version. How can I reply to a reviewer to let them know that the latest version is the right one? Not yet getting the hang of Wikipedia! Sorry and thanks SophieKMak (talk) 10:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * That's a little strange since the other draft wasn't actually submitted for review when this one was declined. The easiest way to solve this would be to have the old draft deleted; you can get rid of it by adding   to the top of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naz Shahrokh. In general, to make improvements you should continue editing the current draft (in this case, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naz Shahrokh (2)) instead of creating a new one.
 * The references could do with some further improvements. For all I can tell, Artslant is user-submitted content, not a reliable source. "Author's conversation with the artist" definitely is not acceptable; Wikipedia requires published sources. Thus, only two of the references, the articles by Parker and Kazan, are the reliable secondary sources Wikipedia content should be based on. I expect some of the sources currently listed under "further reading", such as the New York Times or The National articles, could instead be turned into references (for example, The National, while it doesn't say much about Shahrokh, confirms his job as assistant professor). Currently Shahrokh seems a borderline case on notability issues; our guideline on who and what is notable enough for an article requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Two articles about him are the barest minimum of what's considered "significant coverage" - some editors say it should be at least three (and passing mentions, such as The National, don't count). Huon (talk) 11:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mia Talerico
i want to delete this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.172.201 (talk) 13:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Since you're not the lone author, you cannot have this article deleted (at least not easily). Technically you could nominate it among the miscellany for deletion, but it would be much easier to just ignore it. Huon (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HAGGiS Adventures
Hi there,

My article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HAGGiS Adventures was rejected on 'notability' grounds, although an article on Contiki Tours (closely related to my subject) was acceptable but has no better references, or any outside references at all. I'm just wondering what exactly I'm expected to add to make my subject more 'notable'.

Many thanks, BoyFromNorthernBritain (talk) 16:51, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Regarding the Contiki article: Other problematic articles exist, but that's no reason to create more. Each contribution has to stand on its own merits. The draft's main problem is that most of its content is either unsourced or based on the company's own website, but Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. You have three The Scotsman articles which are just the type of sources we want (the other secondary sources probably aren't entirely reliable by Wikipedia's standards; VisitScotland looks like a press release); more newspaper coverage instead of the less reliable sources would resolve much of the problem. (Personally I'd say that those three are sufficient to establish notability, but that we'd have to remove almost all the content because it isn't really based on those sources.) Huon (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Insert another picture
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pillpriory

Hi, I allready included a recent picture (from 2011) in my article but I would like to include also another one (an engraving from 1830's), this so people can see a comparison between the site from then to the present. My question: how do I do this?

Pillpriory (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * You can upload the second image in exactly the same way as the first. Once it's uploaded, the picture tutorial explains how to add it to the article.
 * As an aside, since the article has been accepted, this is technically the wrong page to ask for help. The next time you might try the general help desk or the Teahouse which specializes in helping new editors. Huon (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC)