Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 August 1

= August 1 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dharshan Munidasa
Can I have some guidance on which areas of this article need to be removed?

Shalini Cane (talk) 04:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that you've removed a lot of the more troublesome sections since you posted this question. I'd suggest just resubmitting it and seeing what the reviewer says. Howicus (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/EXNESS
Hello! Please give me some advices, how to improve the article to get submission. I corrected it after the last comments, but it was still declined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia.tretyakova (talk • contribs) 05:32, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say this draft on the one hand needs better sources - many of your current sources are primary sources (including some that at a glance look like third-party sources; for example this article was written by Exness itself), some others are blogs which are not considered reliable, and the few others seem to be rather obscure trade publications. On the other hand, it should get rid of many of the current sources (for exactly the same reasons) and with them of the content for which not third-party exist. For example, the awards seem to be somethin handed out by the dozen, and I see no indication anybody but Exness and the organizations bestowing the awards cared enough about them to report them. Whether the company is notable is also an important question; that should be easier to decide if the draft has been rewritten based on reliable third-party sources. Huon (talk) 01:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eco Wave Power
Please confirm the article about Eco Wave Power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.179.161.7 (talk) 06:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No one has edited the article since it was last declined. Please address the issues raised there, and then resubmit.  Howicus (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Review of Thomas Barbee
Hello,

I am new to this and would like feedback as to why my article was not accepted. If it is a matter of polishing up, please let me know. If the article is not wikipedia material based upon the subject, I understand that too. I reviewed the guidelines and felt like I adhered to the rules and notes provided.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DSThomeboy (talk • contribs) 13:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thomas Tom Barbee cites no independent sources. Independent, reliable sources are needed that show that this person is notable enough for an article.  Social media is not a good source.  Howicus (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Moneywise
Hello dear people, Could you please help me to understand why my article is not being approved? It doesn't sound like an advertisement and it has some sources. It's a fact that there is such a company and it exists, this article just ads it to the overall company's in UK. what am I doing wrong? Seriously...

Sincerely, your editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoneyArticleEditor (talk • contribs) 17:41, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Your sources are not independent reliable sources. The BBC article is about one of the employees' activities outside of their work at the magazine so it is basically irrelevant. You need sources that discuss the magazine/company itself.

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Backwater
Hi, I have submitted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Backwater. It was declined because "subject appears to be non-notable" (here). However, I think there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. It has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (WP:GNG); Screen International (here) and Yomiuri Shimbun (here). Additionally, IndieWire (here) reported that the film will screen in competition at the Locarno International Film Festival. Won't you please take a second look? 122.26.202.96 (talk) 20:38, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Screen International doesn't really have much to say about the film beyond a plot summary (which, by the way, the article lacks) - in fact it doesn't even confirm all the information in the sentence it's cited for. IndieWire doesn't even devote so much as a single sentence to the film. That leaves us with the Yomiuri Shimbun review which is indeed a reliable third-party source that covering the film in some detail - but a single good source is not enough to establish notabilitay. Can you find three to five sources of that quality? That's usually the lower end of what's required. Huon (talk) 01:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * In fact, I tried to find other significant coverage in third-party reliable sources written in English, but I failed. I hope I'll be able to find some more reviews, add them to the submission, and re-submit it after the screening at the Locarno International Film Festival. Anyway, thank you for taking the time. 123.224.195.116 (talk) 14:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack Grinnage
I'd like to see Jack Grinnage get a page. I submitted it twice & it got rejected twice. The title of my submission is Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/ Jack Grinnage. Jack was in Rebel Without A Cause and was a regular on the TV series Kolchak: the Night Stalker. You can check out his full credits at IDM.COM. I think he deserves a page. I have added references to try to fix the page. Is there any chance you could look at the page I wrote & see if it is good enough now to be accepted? Thanks. AbbythecatAbbythecat (talk) 23:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You references are incomplete. What are "The Night Stalker Companion, by Mark Dawidziak" and "Movies On TV, by Leonard Maltin"? Are they books, magazine articles, websites or something else?
 * You need to complete the publication details of the references. In the case of a book we need the name of the author, the publisher, the year, the page number, and if it is available the ISBN number; for online material we need the url of the web page; a magazine reference needs the name of the magazine, the publisher, the issue number (or date), the article title, the author's name and the page number(s) as well as the ISSN number if it has one. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I followed your instructions & resubmitted. Again, thanks. AbbythecatAbbythecat (talk) 01:19, 3 August 2013 (UTC)