Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 December 13

= December 13 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shane Lavalette
Hello, I have submitted the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shane Lavalette. At first, it was rejected due to copyright, however nothing from the article is copyrighted. Please let me know how this can be resolved. Thank you very much. Ariiise (talk) 03:06, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The page now seems to be at Shane Lavalette. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Techvedic Inc.
Sir/Madam,

This is in reference to an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Techvedic_Inc.) submitted some 15 days ago. I want to know its approval status.

Kindly acknowledge it.

Thanks and regards,

Dindayal Gupta — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dindayal Gupta (talk • contribs) 03:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Dindayal. The approval status of this submission is declined, because I have just declined it. Please refer to the reasons stated therein and do the needful. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of My Life and Other DifficultiesWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ian Parker
Sir/madam, I have been an aerospace journalist since 1980 and I'm writing my first book, as titled above (a humorous autobiography). Is it acceptable for me to create an article on myself or should I get someone else to do it? The main aim would be promotion of my book. Is this allowed?

Ian Parker Ianparkerwriter (talk) 12:39, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The short answer is no. Wikipedia is not to be used for the purpose of promotion. You are, quite simply, not allowed to try and publicise your book by writing about it on Wikipedia.
 * The slightly longer answer is: if the book is published, and if numerous reliable sources (read: national newspapers and literary magazines) choose to write about it, then it might meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria and a neutral, impartial article might be written about it. That article should not be written by you, because you have an insurmountable conflict of interest with Wikipedia in writing about it. If at some point in the future you think that the book meets the aforementioned inclusion criteria, you can request that someone write an article by listing it at Requested Articles. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  12:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Penalty Points Ban in the UK
Hello

i have had my article rejected due to it being written like an essay. This is the first article i have tried to submit so i would like some feedback as the way ot has been written.

I have re written the first paragraph below after looking at other posts to see how they have been written. I would appreciate if this change in style is what you are looking for. Any other tips or links to tips would be great.

Original If a UK driving licence holder accumulates twelve or more penalty points and the offence dates are within three years of each other, a Court must disqualify the person for a minimum period of six months in accordance with Section 35 (1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.[1]

Re Written A Penalty Point Ban or totting up ban is when a driver gets disqualified for driving by gaining tweleve or more points on a driving licence within a 3 years rolling period.In accordance with Section 35 (1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988[1], a driver will be banned for a minimum of 6 moths.

A1057940 (talk) 14:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I think the main problem is that your article is too long and too detailed, and just needs trimming down a bit. Rather than a separate article, you might be better off including information from the Road Traffic Act documents in existing articles - Point system (driving) or Limitation Periods in the UK. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   15:06, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marathon Artists1234
The article I wrote for my company 'Marathon Artists' has been declined twice now, and I have no idea why. Please could someone advise me on where I'm going wrong?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.32.145 (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marathon Artists (2) was declined because it does not provide any independent reliable sources. These are needed to establish that the company is notable by Wikipedia's standards. You can find more about this at VRS. You should also read Conflict of interest. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:56, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Superspectral Imaging
I believe that I accidentally submitted an article twice - once from the Wizard and once from my sandbox. Is there a way to remove the sandbox-based submission, or will it be obvious to the reviewer what has happened?

23:28, 12 December 2013 (diff | hist). . (+601)‎ . .Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Superspectral Imaging ‎ (current) 23:25, 12 December 2013 (diff | hist). . (+1,443)‎ . . N Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Superspectral Imaging ‎ (Page created)

Thanks WMBDG (talk) 16:56, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for checking. However, it's not a problem - User:WMBDG/sandbox is not submitted for review, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Superspectral Imaging is submitted for review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hanstead Stud
Hello. For many years I used to edit a lot, then I stopped or cut back severely, now I'm unsure of procedure, because things have changed. If in doubt, ask. The article I've created is ready to go. I don't know why I submitted it to this "holding pen" in the first place - probably just my misunderstanding of templates. Would it be a breach of Wiki etiquette to unilaterally remove it from the waiting list and stick it in mainspace? Many thanks. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've put it in mainspace for you - the sources could do with ISBNs and some formatting, but all issues can be solved by regular editing. In general, if you are confident that your article is written correctly in accordance with policies, just remove any AFC submission templates and move it. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   18:45, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! BrainyBabe (talk) 19:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of User:K454R1/John Berman
Hello. I followed your advice and revised my article User:K454R1/John_Berman pending to be reviewed. Could this article please be published now? Thanks K454R1 (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There is insufficient evidence here, in the form of reliable references, to show that Berman meets the notability criteria outlined at WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO or WP:CREATIVE. Bellerophon talk to me  11:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Unison RTOS
Hello, dear! I am not sure that I am in right place to ask my question - but this is the only one place that I found. Some time ago I created a new page and I had some discussions about external links. Now I have the new review that has a link to the article subject - but my article was deleted (or is going to be deleted? - I am not sure...) How can I re-edit this article and who can help me with the next revision of it?

I hav the only 1 link to my article - but it does not show the page: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Unison RTOS

Thank you in anvance for help! Regards, Olga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ola.solonenko (talk • contribs) 21:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You can re-edit the submission by clicking on the 'edit' tab found at the top of the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Unison RTOS page. Bellerophon talk to me  11:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)