Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 February 14

= February 14 =

Lack of references lead to copyright infringement??
Hello, The problem with what I wrote (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/O'Reilly House Museum) was the fact that it contained copyrighted information.

Is the problem because I neglected to provide proper references for the information that I used? I did draw the information from various sources and although I provided some references, were they insufficient?

Therefore, if I reference it -- more fully than I have -- will it no longer be regarded as a copyright infringement?

Thank you, Malitza (talk) 01:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Giving the source is not sufficient to resolve a copyright infringement. Rather, you should summarize what the source says in your own words. See also WP:COPYVIO for details on what constitutes a copyright infringement. Huon (talk) 01:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Referencing - Article for Creation L.A. Jay
Thank you Huon for your time. So if I footnote my references that will help right?

Also - the reference you mention is to the official website of the record label Delicious Vinyl - does that not count as reliable?

Best, Alice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.186.8.108 (talk) 05:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * While turning the references into footnotes will help, I don't think the current sources suffice, no matter how well we present them. The record label's website, for example, is not an independent source. To be considered notable, the LA Jay must have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject - not just passing mentions, not websites that have a financial interest in LA Jay's success, not YouTube or blogs. We're after news coverage or articles in reputable music magazines - sources with a reputation of fact-checking and accuracy, subject to editorial oversight. Huon (talk) 06:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Master Dhananjay ( child artiste in malayalam movies)
Dear at Wikipedia,

I had submitted an article in the name of Master Dhananjay. he is a child artist in malayalam film industry. he has acted in over 20 films including many block busters. He is well known but his article is not yet published in Wiki. It is been over 5 months now since it was published. Can you answer the reason, or any thing more to be done??

Regards, Premjith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Premjithb (talk • contribs) 10:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Your article was stored as a sandbox, but was not submitted for review until this morning, so nobody will have known it needed reviewing. I have declined the article as it has no sources, which are essential for any article. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   10:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * (ec) Article submissions must have independent reliable sources - see WP:42. Compare with the references section for another child actor (artist), Asa Butterfield. Format your references in the same way to those, but only include references that are both independent and reliable. Good luck! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:16, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Copyright infringement -- what are the reasons?
Hello, I've been trying to provide an entry for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/O'Reilly House Museum and it's been rejected thus far because of copyright problems.

I confess it is written entirely in my own words. But just in case I was accidentally copying the sentences of others (one never knows), I double-checked and it really seems to be fine. Checking simply involved placing each sentence in an internet search and of course, the only that emerged was my own entry on the wikipedia site.

If the copyright infringement is due to the need for more references, I can easily do that.

However, I just wanted to make sure there is no other reason why it may be rejected due to copyright problems (before I propose it again but with more references)??

Just asking for a bit of help as I'm not really sure beyond the need for an enhanced reference section what would make it not a copyright infraction??

Thanks so much for your help ...! Malitza (talk) 16:23, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem here is that just copying your own words from your own website isn't sufficient for Wikipedia's use. The content must also be licenced by our CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, which means other people can take the text, create derivative works from it, and, provided you're attributed correctly, sell it. Unless we get explicit permission (via OTRS) that your website is licensed in this way, we have to remove the text as it doesn't fit our terms. In any case, you still need to make sure that there is coverage in reliable sources, such as newspapers or magazines, that prove the museum is notable enough to have an article. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   16:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I cannot look at the deleted draft and thus cannot tell what copyright it was supposed to infringe upon. We do not delete text as a copyright infringement just because it is unsourced; in those cases we'd usually assume the author wrote it for Wikipedia, which would automatically mean that it's licensed under a free license. Deletion as a copyright violation requires a source whose copyright the text infringes upon. If the draft was the same as your sandbox, then my quick search for such a source failed. I have thus asked the admin who deleted the draft, RHaworth, to take another look and to explain which copyright the draft violated.
 * I also think Ritchie333 may be mistaken; if you had previously published the text on your own website (which I understand you didn't actually do) and owned the copyright, then by re-publishing it on Wikipedia you would release it under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license and not infringe on your own copyright - but firstly, we might need evidence that you, User:Malitza, were indeed the copyright holder, and secondly, I'm no expert on copyright law and might be wrong. Huon (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Huon is right, I misread "my own entry on the wikipedia site" as "my own website". Sorry about that. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   17:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, neither version was a copyvio from here. I have restored the AfC submission under current state of User:Malitza/sandbox. It may not have been a copyvio but it certainly well deserved deletion for spammy tone. Malitza, kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your museum is notable and writes about it here. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * RHaworth, please comment on the content, not the contributors and remember this is a help desk for new editors - if COI was innately understood by the vast majority of people, we wouldn't see violations of it so often. Chill out. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   20:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2026 FIFA World Cup
I'm trying to start the page for the 2026 FIFA world cup. The page was deleted some years back, but now that there are actual announcements and official resources for this event, it should definitely have a page up. (By comparison, the 2026 olympics have a page already.) I put the page up at "WP:AFC 2026 FIFA World Cup" first, but the prompt recommended I transfer to "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2026 FIFA World Cup". I tried, and it said the page already existed. I looked it up, and it was just a farce and the editors had already declined its induction. So, I put in my article in its place. Is there some way I can get that page re-reviewed with new content in it? Not sure how these things work. Leoberacai (talk) 17:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You need to add   to the article somewhere. I've done this for you.  Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   17:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I am busy reviewing the draft and it is clearly fit for mainspace. I have requested the unSALTing of 2026 FIFA World Cup so that this draft can be accepted. Roger (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Iranian leader article
Dear Madam/Sir: I have a general question. I have not been able to find an answer to it. Someone wants to write a brief story about what he did as a leader in the old Iran. He has asked me to help him determine how he can go about this. His question is: For the initial inclusion of the article in Wikipedia, how extensive should the summary be? Wikipedia used to be so simple to use. That was one of the greatest features of this great medium. It is now very hard to find instructions about many things.

I would be greatly appreciative if someone would help me to get an answer for this man. I wish you all the best.

Very truly yours, Laleh Mohajer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmohajer (talk • contribs) 17:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * First of all, the former leader should have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest - writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged because it's hard to maintain a neutral point of view about oneself. Secondly, Wikipedia content should be based not on personal recollections but on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as news coverage or maybe history textbooks. To be considered notable, a person must have been the subject of significant coverage in such sources. Thus, the draft should be as extensive as the sources allow it to be. There are no set requirements on article length; if it establishes the subject's notability, it's not too short and can be expanded later. Huon (talk) 17:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Kind Voice
I need help trying to cite an interview with a source in Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Kind Voice. I tried using the "named references" tool in the Article Wizard, but it wouldn't load after several minutes. Is there a template I can use? The source is David Levins, founder of A Kind Voice. He was interviewed on Feb. 6, 2013.

Pamelaehamilton (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * We have multiple citation templates, for example cite web or possibly cite news. The templates' documentation pages explain how to use them. When you look at your draft's code you'll find that your current references already use cite web.
 * Speaking of your references, I don't think they currently suffice to establish A Kind Voice's notability. One is a dictionary definition of "alchemy" that has nothing to say about A Kind Voice, another is the organization's own website, and the third is a directory of warmlines which does mention A Kind Voice, but whose entry on that non-profit seems to have been written by A Kind Voice itself - it says "please call us at ...". To be considered notable an organization must have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as news reports. The interview with the founder might be better (depending on who interviewed him), but the founder isn't really an independent source of information either. Huon (talk) 04:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Walton (barque)
Hello, This is my first attempt at writing a Wikipedia article. It is for a school project in a class on the history of shipbuilding in Nova Scotia, Canada. I don't know how to further edit my draft. I would also like to know how to insert a box with various information about my ship (Walton) such as 'owner', 'port of registry', 'tonnage', etc. Thank you very much. I'm just learning :)

BigHarbour (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC) Big Harbour


 * The box is called an "infobox"; those for ships are a little more complicated than usual. You can find information on how to use them (including code examples) at Template:Infobox ship begin. Some details on the ship's career would be nice: Who owned it, what cargo did it usually carry, did it have some common routes? Furthermore, the sources are currently insufficient. The one footnote does not confirm what it's cited for; it does not even mention the painting. The other two sources contradict each other: One says the Walton was registered at Windsor, Nova Scotia, the other, at Liverpool, Merseyside, England - which is correct? Some more extensive sources would probably be necessary to establish that the ship is notable by Wikipedia's standards in the first place - maybe it's mentioned in textbooks on 19th century sailing ships, or in books on local history? Where did all the details you currently give come from? Huon (talk) 04:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)