Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 January 12

= January 12 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sayadaw U Tejaniya
Hello --

This article was just declined because of notability standards and I'm confused about their application here. I'm also not clear about how to contact the person who made the determination as wikipedia directs me to his talk page but his talk page seems to dissuade one from trying to reach him there.

The 'Golden Rule' requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." There are already references in the proposed article to full published articles - not just passing mentions -- on the subject in two of the four most prominent English-language magazines on Buddhism and meditation, both journals of longstanding with large circulations.

I'm not sure why that wouldn't be sufficient to meet the standard. If it isn't, please let me know what would be. There are articles on Sayadaw U Tejaniya in magazines all over the world, but most of them are not in English but rather in Burmese, Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese.

Iguana0000 (talk) 10:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not answering your question in full, but just commenting on your question - the article seems to all be referenced from a single source - the website OF Sayadaw U Tejaniya. Maybe a better tag would have been a verifibility tag, but that's not important. You said he has articles published in notable journals, but that's missing the point. A lot of people publish on notable newspapers and journals, but it does not mean they are notable. Can you find notable newspapers that did a feature on him? To contact the guy, please click here. He is available, he's just clowning with you.  Kinkreet ~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 11:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As the reviewer commented on the draft, major parts, including, for example, the entire "Overseas teachings" section, don't give any sources at all. Wikipedia content must be verifiable from reliable, independent sources, and much of this draft simply isn't.
 * Of the sources you do give, one is a broken link to a blog (probably not a reliable source in the first place) and most others are interviews with Sayadaw U Tejaniya - not quite as independent as we'd like. Huon (talk) 16:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Donut Press
Hi please could you explain why the citations contained in my draft article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Donut Pressare not adequate? The awards refered too are internationaly recognised and the sources independent. I see there are many articles with fewer and less independant sources that are published on Wiki, indeed there is an article about a similarly sized poetry press 'Penned in the margins' which is published here with fewer and less prestigious citations. I would suggest the success and unique nature of the press make it notable. If there is something amiss with the way the sources/citations have been included then please advise. Thankyou Nickondite Nickondite (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Of your four references, three don't even devote a single sentence to Donut Press, and the fourth is a profile written by Donut Press founder Andy Ching - not an independent source. To be considered notable a topic must have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, where "significant coverage" is usually interpreted as "multiple sources of at least a paragraph each about the subject". Your references don't satisfy that standard, and equally problematic, they don't serve to verify all the draft's content - for example, none of them mentions Jackson or Warner.
 * And while other problematic articles may exist, that's no reason to create more - each submission must stand on its own merits. Huon (talk) 16:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ian Stylezz
I'm creating this page for Ian Stylezz...what am I doing wrong that is preventing it from being approved?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ian_Stylezz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.31.222.133 (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The draft claims Stylezz has received "much critical acclaim for his work in film since the 2004", yet one of the references doesn't mention him at all, and the other three are bare cast listings without any kind of details. And I somehow doubt roles like "Pier Salesman" are likely to attract critical acclaim. In short, your draft's content is unverifiable and there's no indication Stylezz is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Huon (talk) 19:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

The information submitted IS NOT personal opinion. The article is written by me from transcripts received directly from band members and therefore reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris4shon (talk • contribs) 22:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC) 

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scrap base 10
Come back submit  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.250.56 (talk) 17:35, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I cannot tell what that draft is supposed to be about, and it doesn't cite any reliable sources. At best it looks like a personal opinion about which number system we should use, but Wikipedia does not publish editors' personal opinions. Huon (talk) 19:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Family (band)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Family_%28band%29&action=edit&redlink=1

Hi, I recently submitted a page that you did not accept based on copyright material. Information I submitted from http://www.angelfire.com/in2/familys/home.html is my own work as I created the website therefore copyright is not infringed. Photos I submitted were either taken by me or given to me with permission to use from the group. How do I go about citation on information that I know is correct as I collected it directly from the band members.

Thanks

Chris4shon (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Family_%28band%29&action=edit&redlink=1

The information submitted IS NOT personal opinion. The article is written by me from transcripts received directly from band members and therefore reliable.

Chris4shon (talk) 22:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, unfortunately WIkipedia policy automatically grants copyrighted status to text taken from elsewhere on the internet, unless it is specifically disclaimed at source. If you do own the copyright to http://www.angelfire.com/in2/familys/home.html then you can donate the material to Wikipedia; however, it will be necessary for you to prove that you own the copyright. To find out how to do this, please read Donating copyrighted materials and follow the instructions. Pol430   talk to me  23:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * My initial thoughts (before I read the angelfire source) were "this is a duplicate". You need to call your article something else, as there is already an article on Family (band), which had notable chart success and one member subsequently played in Blind Faith alongside Eric Clapton and Steve Winwood, which means it will probably keep the "main" band title. -- Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   12:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)